Twitter appears to be in an uproar about the latest being they are possible separating.
Is it true?
Might be. There does seem to be a heavier rotation of articles about how they have separated recently.
But then again, there have been rumors in the past have faded away after nothing more appeared to come of it at that time.
As always with them, it's hard to tell.
What are your thoughts?
Comments
(BTW, The gap in succession from the Romano-British to Saxon clergy is much shorter than one might expect. `Dark Ages' be damned. I was deeply moved by the Canterbury/St Augustine's Gospels appearing at the Coronation - a book over 1,400 yrs old.).
"I know people in Monticeto and the rumors aren't true. They still live together and are apparently getting along
They had a rough patch over the coronation.
But they are not living apart or any of that nonsense. They don't let people see their home, they receive friends at a local hotel. ."
https://www.tumblr.com/houseofbrat/724314032013737985/i-know-people-in-monticeto-and-the-rumors-arent?source=share
"The Harkles know plenty of people. Yes they aren't in with the top A listers (who are only a few dozen people in Montecito, most of whom don't even live there as their main residence).
Pretty much everyone else local has kissed their asses and made them welcome. There are a couple Netflix big wigs in the area who regularly entertain them. Oprah recently loaned them her Maui home for a little jaunt. I wouldn't worry about their social life. It isn't what she wants, but most people would envy it.
I don't live in Monticeto my cousin does. As I have said before my cuz has children at the same school as Archie (not the same grade, class or teacher). I know through her that they live in the community, are together, and participate in the community. Regular people like my cousin (married to a wealthy tech guy) don't hate her. She was so excited she nearly pissed her pants the first time she got to meet Haz. There are billions of people out there. Most are neither saints nor sinners, just people living their lives who don't strongly hate or love meg. And most of them get excited over any kind of celebrity. Of course, that's not who Megs wants as friends. But just because they aren't the leaders of the cool crowd, that doesn't mean they are frozen out and no one has anything to do with them."
https://www.tumblr.com/houseofbrat/724314032013737985/i-know-people-in-monticeto-and-the-rumors-arent?source=share
-----
energy: we start with a rediscovered freedom for her, she has freed herself from something, the institution, from a society?!, she appreciates her status even if all is not rosy. She may not be dollar rich but she is at peace and happy with a man. Her bond satisfied her, she is also working on a project she loves which she hopes will bring her a lot of money.
tarot: the wheel of fortune is turning favorably for her after several losses in several areas, there is a project coming up (or a baby, but not sure) There is something stalled about finances and emotional way between her and harry (I sincerely believe that this summer they are not together)
there's a happy ending about relationships and bonds, it looks like (like the story of victoria and david beckam) she's breaking up with people i think she's cleaning up for her new life.
tarot meghan in september: there are incompatibilities and frustrated expectations between harry and meghan. There are a lot of things that meghan is trying to implement but she can't get them done right or they don't come out right. I'm told about a decision that is postponed, because we can't agree, yet we need this decision to start this new cycle. There is an announcement from the past or something that comes back to us and it is a victory, we can move forward. We feel blessed, we can celebrate and work on this project and advance our projects or advance in our life
-----
https://www.tumblr.com/mysteriouslytransparentwitch/724270599163314176/meghan-markle-30-july-2023-tarot-reading?source=share
Harry and Meghan's biographer Omid Scobie is no longer 'royal executive editor' of Yahoo! News which he used to launch regular attacks against the monarchy
The Beckhams are a salutary tale for the Sussexes
Success and popularity in the US take more than trading on connections – David and Victoria have worked hard
Grafting, rather than grifting, is key in work-obsessed America. But not everyone is successful in cracking the code to winning over the US. When David Beckham arrived in Miami in 2007 to promote “soccer”, few felt the Brit and his seemingly fame-hungry wife would make much impact. Harry and Meghan, meanwhile, were far more fêted than the Beckhams when they first landed on American soil. But as they are finding out, it’s a long game – and the Beckhams are a salutary tale for the Sussexes, who are watching their popularity rapidly fade.
There’s no doubting it: David and Victoria are thriving. Last Friday, represented a pivotal moment. On a hot Florida night, Argentina superstar Lionel Messi lined up for Inter Miami – aka the side Beckham co-owns. Getting one of the most revered footballers in the world to sign for a US team was a triumph for Beckham and further boosted the profile of Inter Miami. The club, which only hosted its debut home match three years ago, is now valued at $600 million.
It’s just one illustration of the way in which David and Victoria have made a glittering success of life in the US. Not only do they have all the trappings of the American dream – a $23 million penthouse in Miami Beach; Eva Longoria, Kate Beckinsale and Tom Cruise on speed-dial; an ultra-close family unit and billionaire Floridian in-laws (the Peltzes) – they also have a real purpose there.
Victoria, whose fashion and beauty lines are still considered to be relatively small by US standards, is also seen as a striver. She has grown her brand in the US by regularly showing at New York Fashion Week.
Alan Edwards, public relations expert and founder of The Outside Organisation, represented both Beckhams in the early years of their careers. He fondly recalls the couple’s determined approach to building up “brand Beckham”, and says he was impressed by their long-term way of looking at things. “Victoria was very interested in fashion and determined to build a business in it,” says Edwards. “She set about becoming a successful designer and building her label with total commitment and passion.”
David was equally single-minded about what he wanted to achieve. “When I first sat down with him in Manchester, he talked about his belief that football would become massive in the US and also about his passion for the women’s game,” says Edwards. “They’ve worked incredibly hard to build their success in America and always done things the right way. The growth of everything they’ve done has been organic, natural and, above all, authentic.”
Those three words could not be attached to the Sussexes. The couple were recently accused of being “grifters” by a Spotify executive and agreed to mutually terminate their $20 million deal with the streaming giant. Archetypes – their only show – was cancelled after one season.
They are still working with Netflix – for which they said they would focus “on creating content that informs but also gives hope” when they signed a reported $100 million deal in 2020. Thus far, however, all they’ve released is Harry & Meghan, a not-exactly-hopeful documentary that mostly saw them complain about the Royal family.
And this, unfortunately, is the crux of their issue. As the chart-topping sales of Harry’s biography Spare prove, the world is fascinated by their gripes with King Charles and the Prince and Princess of Wales, but not much interested in anything else they may have to say.
India McTaggart, The Telegraph’s royal correspondent, says the Duke and Duchess of Sussex gave away their trump card too early in their move to rebrand themselves in the US – “and ultimately what they currently sell is a finite story that appears to be running out of road for their American audience.” Meanwhile, the Beckhams built a brand based on decades of hard work in their respective industries.
“It appears that the Sussexes have yet to find their ‘unique selling point’ besides their experiences as former working royals – and therein may lie the problem of what many Americans perceive to be dwindling star-power,” she adds. “It remains to be seen whether they can be retained when they pivot to non-royal-related content.”
PR guru Nick Ede says that while the Beckhams use their platform “for good and not in a virtue-signalling way”, the same can not be said for team Sussex. “I feel that Meghan and Harry haven’t earned their stripes; what have they actually done?” he says. “What have they brought into the US economy?”
And while Victoria and David are seen “letting their hair down”, something that “really engages” the public, Harry and Meghan’s behaviour is perceived as elitist and exclusive, Ede suggests.
Jack Izzard, CEO of Rhizome Media Group, says that the Sussexes’ failure to crack America lies in their inability to represent the American dream. “The Beckhams embody the American dream in a way that the Sussexes never can,” he notes. “The Beckhams combine clear talent and prodigious hard work. In contrast, the Sussexes exude entitlement in a very un-American way. That’s the ironic thing, because one of them is American!”
Izzard says that the Sussexes also lack the “humility” of the Beckhams. “David is a goodwill ambassador for Unicef and has used his star power to do good work. But he never tried to eclipse that charity, whereas by contrast the Archewell Foundation feels a bit of a personal flex as much as it’s a fundraiser.”
Good humour rather than a “must I endure this” attitude goes a long way, too. “Victoria always knows when to give a journalist a cheeky quote that’s not necessarily flattering, but which will make a good headline,” says another London-based PR, who used to live in New York. “She’s savvy, she has a sense of humour and uses it to her advantage. People like Meghan, who try to control the narrative and only present themselves in a perfect light, forget that the public warms to a humour and the ability to show a flaw.”
The US media had previously been rather po-faced about mocking Harry and Meghan, but seemingly found their sense of humour when a South Park episode featured a couple bearing a striking similarity to the Sussexes.
America laughed again when comedian Chris Rock mocked the duo in his Netflix special, dismissing Meghan’s complaints by saying, “Some of that shit she went through was not racism”, but ‘in-law’ behaviour”. Harry and Meghan did not laugh along, and were reportedly so upset by South Park that they considered suing.
It seems things aren’t looking quite so rosy Stateside for the Sussexes. According to polling commissioned for Newsweek, Harry’s popularity dropped 48 points in the US from December to March this year, while Meghan’s dropped 40. Plus, there is the issue of family values. “Showing that you have a good family unit is more important over there than it is here,” says the same PR. “The Beckhams have been married for decades and are always pictured with their four kids and all the grandparents and siblings, while Harry has, as we know, exposed a lot of family secrets. They’re now estranged from most relatives on both sides and this doesn’t play well.”
Speaking of queues, David won a number of fans when he joined the queue to pay his respects to the late Queen last September, and while nobody would expect Harry to line up to see his own grandmother, there is a sense of entitlement radiating from him and Meghan. It was alleged that, following the funeral, the Sussexes asked US President Joe Biden for a lift home on Air Force One – a request that was firmly denied.
“The Beckhams certainly live well, which Americans expect and admire, but also they spend their own money, and that is key,” says one PR expert. “They’re not scroungers and they never have been.”
All this puts Harry and Meghan in a difficult position. As the cost-of-living crisis bites in the US, it’s becoming clear that their approach has to change.But how do you carve out a successful career when the only thing you’re famous for is your family? At this point, Harry and Meghan might consider giving Brooklyn Beckham a call…
Harry and Meghan have violated the Hollywood A-lister code – and there’s no turning back
Since they dropped their cluster bomb of revelations, scarcely a month has gone by without talk of another cold-shouldering.
If there’s one thing every agent and PR tells their famous clients, it’s never to read the comments “below the line” in any online article. Generally, this is sound advice, but in rare cases – such as Meghan and Harry’s, where good advice has repeatedly been ignored and delusion reigns – I wonder whether it may actually be helpful. A reality check. The therapeutic equivalent of an ice bath.
Take Sunday’s splash about the new cold war between the Sussexes and the Beckhams. Because apparently, David and Victoria are the latest to have been “Markled” (nixed, ghosted, frozen out or excised with the surgical precision the former actress is infamous for). This supposedly happened after Meghan and Harry began to suspect that the A-list friends they had so carefully cultivated were leaking stories about them to the press. And oh, it’s all so deliciously Year 7, isn’t it? Wagatha Christie with honours and titles.
Anyway, we’ve been told that the accusations, which the Mail on Sunday claims “came in a tense phone call”, left David “absolutely bloody furious” – and that “any making up now is unlikely”.
I would think so. There’s a reason the dispute between Coleen Rooney and Rebekah Vardy raged for two-and-a-half years, after Wayne Rooney’s wife accused the latter of leaking stories about her. Far worse than fraternising with the enemy is the implicit: “I’m more famous than you. Famous enough for you to be profiting from our connection”.
Cut to the comments beneath Sunday’s report, and it’s a variation on a single theme: “The Beckhams must be so relieved!” “If I were the Beckhams, I’d look at this as a lucky escape.” “Are we sure Posh and Becks didn’t dump the Markles?”
This does seem more likely. They would only be following the Hollywood herd if they had. After all, since the “Markles” dropped their cluster bomb of revelations – royal and otherwise – in December 2022 and January 2023 – scarcely a month has gone by without talk of another A-list cold-shouldering.
First it was Oprah Winfrey supposedly “distancing” herself; then singer Katy Perry and her fiancé Orlando Bloom, who were reportedly once close to the couple and Meghan and Harry’s neighbours in Montecito.
We heard that neither Steven Spielberg nor Rob Lowe, also neighbours, had made any attempt to get to know them, that Taylor Swift had turned down an invitation to appear on Meghan’s podcast, and that the Clooneys – who were, of course, at the wedding – are now no longer a part of their circle (asked how he knew Meghan, George is quoted as replying: “I don’t”).
When it comes to fads, fashion and friendships, Hollywood’s elite are nothing if not bovine, and there are two things they fear and flee from, above all else – and as someone who has lived in Los Angeles for many years, I have seen this first-hand.
The first is failure. Indeed, superstition around this is such that you only see the word mouthed by a certain sector, who are so terrified of “catching it” that they would mask up around anyone associated with a recent flop, firing or faux pas if they could. Although they would ideally never find themselves in the same room as that person again.
The second is indiscretion. Beyond being potentially damaging to one’s life and career, it’s seen as the preserve of reality stars and bored Beverly Hills housewives: basically tacky.
Asked why Harry and Meghan were being left off so many guest lists last year, one LA source told The Spectator that it was partly down to their “capacity to share”. Only Tinseltowners could call someone a “blabbermouth” with such passive aggressive grace.
But you can see why a couple prone to detailing the contents of their famous friends’ fridges in books (Harry helpfully told the world that he saw “mushroom chocolates” in Friends star Courteney Cox’s fridge during a party at her house) may not be top of many celebrities’ friendship lists.
Last week, US producer Paula Froelich touted another theory about the big Hollywood freeze-out. Quite simply: business. “Everyone’s got a movie to sell,” she explained, “and a Broadway play they want to debut on screen in London or [London’s] West End and they know that Prince William and Kate — who are the biggest [celebrity] gets over there – won’t show if they think someone is friends with Harry and Meghan.”
All this may leave many feeling gleeful, after the way that the couple treated their nearest and dearest. But when I think about everything the Sussexes could have been and done; how much was theirs for the taking? Well, to me it just seems very, very silly.
I looked up St. Paul’s wiki page and see that tourists are charged an eye/watering £23 to enter. However, it’s free to attend services, which still happen every day. I imagine photos are frowned upon unless you pay.
@Sandie,
Sounds like a sugar is working overtime. Archie is 4 years old, so he’s not in a “grade”—he’s in nursery school if he’s a real kid. If Haz and wife have been warmly welcomed by all the celeb neighbors, why were they blanked cold by the Diaz party outside that restaurant? What need has a couple with 2 small children who refuses to have anyone over ever of a mansion containing 9 bedrooms and 16 bathrooms? Celebrity friends would be discreet because that’s what they moved to Montecito for—actual privacy. Why does Harry need a getaway suite in a hotel if he can simply stay in another wing of that cavernous house?
I wouldn’t fall for any of that. It’s all lies.
the tumbler”cousin”. is that M with a hotmail account. or a sugar? why would you entertain guests at a local hotel if you live in a big house and are embracing the california casual lifestyle. i’m sure a bench or two (reference deliberate) would be enough 😉
scooby Do. did he quit just like M quit Spotify? ha. not to worry his explosive (not diarrhea) revelations in his Finding Montecito will prob sell enough books to pay for the next round of plastic surgery.
the pr has been nuts. discarding old A list friends, lots of parties without them,Travelyst Moving on, harry and Nacho bromance on again and going on the road to Singapore. are they coming back to the Uk? as Working Royals?, for good, for vacation, with kids? it’s exhausting. and M hasn’t done a picket line for SAG yet. and there’s the archie first day of real school pics lots to think about
I think St. paul’s is popular for non-british tourists for the “it’s where diana was married” church. no doubt Miss M wanted the comparisons too.
`Joe Biden's activist sister supports Meghan as First Lady'...
She is a favourite among Democrats for the White House, among women. As many commentators say: 'please do'. Every hidden, forgotten and 'maybe' skeleton will come tumbling out, for her, her husband and her mother. She will not cope well and it will make the whinefest in South Africa look mild ... 'no one asks if I am ok'. It would be a pity to be deprived of the entertainment! (And I think hapless would be fully taken in by the dream of being the first 'first man' of America, on state visits to the UK, state banquet in their honour at WC or BC ... and then reality will hit home!)
Tuesday, Aug 1st 2023 9AM 16°C 12PM 18°C 5-Day Forecast
EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE: King Charles decides against making Duke of Norfolk a Night of the Garter over Coronation planning row
By EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE FOR THE DAILY MAIL
UPDATED: 22:22, 20 June 2023
...one does wonder.
Actually, that's not quite what she said last year:
Valerie Biden Owens, President Joe Biden’s sister, has said that Meghan Markle would make a good potential candidate for the US presidency.
Speaking to ITV’s Good Morning Britain, the former campaign manager and close adviser to the president, said “it’s wonderful to have women in politics, the more women we have, the better our democratic system will work”.
“We embrace all women and we welcome her to come in and join the Democratic Party,” she added.
When asked if she thought the Duchess of Sussex would make a good candidate for the presidency, Ms Biden Owens said, “yes, perhaps, of course, she will”.,
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/joe-biden-meghan-markle-president-b2075731.html
What I imagine she meant, about *running, was:
“Yes, perhaps. Of course, she bloody well will, given half a chance.”
I note that, at that time, she wasn't even a member of the DP.
Presumably, it's yet another manifestation.
Yep, manifestation/exhumation of old news.
'As Meghan's US popularity nosedives below that of Harry, a smidgen of good news for her. Joe Biden's political activist sister Valerie has endorsed her as a woman she would back for the White House.
And despite having never stood for election, the former TV actress is topping a poll of Democrats asked which woman they would vote for.
She ties with vice president Kamala Harris and is ahead of Hillary Clinton.
But US polling experts noted that Meghan's name in the frame is testament to the 'fact that the choices the Democrats have are not great'.' (DM)
They can say that again. Anyway, ain't going to happen.
Sacrosank
‘twas a Royal Peculiar
When ‘h’ married
Doria junior
ABC* vested too quick
Abbey denied her
St Paul’s bells decried her
Poor St George had to host
Perp ‘n’ Dick**
*Archbishop of Canterbury
**Perpendicular
I do believe that they are generally on cordial terms with people in Montecito, but people in trade are going to be friendly with customers and one has to behave very badly for gossip to spread. And I do believe that especially ordinary folk would be rather impressed meeting 'the prince', especially as there is so much media coverage of them, and the royal family has been getting global attention with the funeral of the late Queen and the coronation of King Charles, plus the golden couple, William and Catherine, spread plenty of fairy dust when they visit.
The Beckham thing is a re-write of an old dispute when the Harkles were still in the UK. Careful re-writing makes it seem like something recent.
Socializing with Netflix big wigs was something put out when the Harkles first moved to Montecito. And probably wasn't true then.
Biden's sister didn't endorse Mm for anything. She responded to a question in what she probably thought was a diplomatic way. She wasn't going to publicly bash Mm.
A5 the time she was asked about Mm running, Mm bashing would still have been frowned upon. Her comments were from over a year ago, May 2022. She never said she wanted Mm to run for anything.
Below is the entirety of her comments, which were part of a larger interview.
“It’s wonderful to have women in politics,” the 46th US president’s younger sister opined, according to Newsweek. “The more women we have, the better our democratic system will work, with a better point of view, a different point of view and we embrace all women.
“We welcome [Meghan] to come in and join the Democratic Party,” she added.
When asked if the Duchess of Sussex would “make a good presidential candidate one day,” Biden Owens replied: “Yes, perhaps. Of course she will.”
https://nypost.com/2022/05/10/bidens-sister-says-meghan-markle-a-good-presidential-candidate/
https://youtu.be/NBEzWkHii18
https://youtu.be/bAVO_0dGJ5k
https://youtu.be/WyFl8pWF66o
I wonder where she came across the tip about 'the power of the stare'?
Suits, which was launched on Netflix in June, has become a hit show on service
Read more: Has Prince Harry been dumped by eco-tourism firm?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-12360063/Meghan-Markles-Suits-wins-viewers-hit-Netflix-four-years-axed-TV.html
I do believe that they are generally on cordial terms with people in Montecito, but people in trade are going to be friendly with customers and one has to behave very badly for gossip to spread. And I do believe that especially ordinary folk would be rather impressed meeting 'the prince', especially as there is so much media coverage of them, and the royal family has been getting global attention with the funeral of the late Queen and the coronation of King Charles, plus the golden couple, William and Catherine, spread plenty of fairy dust when they visit.
I agree. Merchants & tradespeople are going to be tactful, especially in a small community like Montecito. I'm sort of at a loss as to what kind of schools the Todgers could access in Montecito, as it seems to contain primarily older, albeit very wealthy residents.
The school stuff sounds a bit suspect. However, perhaps little Archie was at a small nursery school which wasn't comprised of self important types. My kids were raised on the East Coast several years ago & went to a pre-K/12 school which included the children of CEOs of some huge financial institutions, royalty of an oil rich Middle Eastern country, assorted titled Europeans, & (rarely) some big names in entertainment/media. (The school didn't want any out of control publicity & prized privacy, which is why I found that HBO series about a private school completely implausible. I couldn't believe parents would spill their guts so indiscreetly, even over a murder. They'd clam up & distance themselves as much as possible from the scandal, & quietly demand that the families involved be booted out of the school. Maybe the West Coast is different.)
Needless to say, the parents at my kids' school were pretty full of themselves, & likely would have been unimpressed by a D-list actress, even if she were married to a British prince. It's hard to impress such people. Perhaps if the Todgers were in the habit of writing large checks to some new friend's pet charity or could get them on the boards of institutions like the Getty museum, they would be popular dinner guests. The Todgers don't seem to have that sort of generosity or pull anywhere.I'd say this bit of gossip is from ILBW herself or some naive sugar.
That said, present day Southern California might be completely different from the East Coast of several years ago. Perhaps moms at the kind of schools the Todgers deem worthy of their offspring would be thrilled to meet ILBW. I just can't see it.
Diva-like & demanding moms were disliked by both other parents & the school's administrators & teachers. There was quite a bit of subtle & passive aggressive retaliation for such behavior, but perhaps ILBW is a living doll with her fellow parents. If Todger is anything like the good-natured guy the RF tried to make him out to be, he's likely be accepted. He's the royal, after all. Who knows what the Todgers are really like?
Democrats behind the scenes are said to be working overtime to convince Michelle Obama to run for President. She isn’t at all qualified but obviously her husband would be the one in charge. 😱
Americans are bored of Meghan Markle – so why are they binge-watching Suits?
The Duchess of Sussex finally has a huge Netflix hit, thanks to the vacuous legal drama she left behind. What's the appeal?
What is the appeal indeed?
When I first got Amazon Prime Video, It was 2020 I think and the Sussexes had already decamped to California. I don’t have cable at home so I had never seen the show, but I had seen adverts for it. It looked bad. I don’t know if any Nutties temember L.A. Law in the 1980s? It felt like Suits was trying to rip off that very successful series, Except on the cheap with a no-name charisma free cast. LA Law starred Harry Hamlin, Susan Dey and Corbin Bernsen in the main cast. Gabriel Macht is decent looking, But I’m wondering how Sharkle Got a recurring role when she had had to all appearances not a single acting lesson in her entire life. While this era was admittedly the most attractive she’s ever been, thanks to being styled and dressed by professionals who understood her body type, still, by Hollywood standards, and I must be blunt… She was a bit of a woofer. I can easily imagine 3000 better looking starlets vying for the role of Rachel Zane. LA is very diverse and being biracial as her only selling point didn’t mark her as anything special whatsoever. There are girls working as cashiers in Los Angeles that are 1 million times better looking.
During my six weeks of Covid lockdown I was bored, so I watched about 20 minutes of the first episode. It was all I could stand, and 20 minutes is my cut off for any show or movie that’s not grabbing me. When we first see Rachel Zane, She is rolling around in the sheets with her boss. Literally, I’m not making that up. *’s eagerness to remove her kit it’s probably why she got hired over thousands of better actresses for this rather negligible part. I can’t tell if the show ever got any better because I’m not wasting another minute of my life on it. But I can vouch for people watching it on Netflix that have never seen it before because I was recently in my hair salon and overheard two stylists talking about how they are binging the show.
To my mind it doesn’t have anything to recommend it, and I would say that even if I was not negatively biased toward Harry’s wife. It’s just subpar, and I wouldn’t bother with it even if it were the only entertainment on a 20 hour flight to Australia. I’d rather read the safety card 100 times.
I think I watched the first 5-10 minutes of the pilot episode. * is not the major character but plays a part in the opening sequences. I didn't find it captivating and felt no urge to continue watching.
I watched this for as long as I could bear, which wasn’t long.
Is she playing herself here, or Rachel Zane in real life?
“The stories of the competitors and their families will also be in the farewell show on the 16th. September from 8 p.m. "This very emotional element is to be personally moderated by Meghan, Duchess of Sussex," it says.“
“Prince Harry, the patron and initiator of the #InvictusGames, will speak the final words and hand over the Invictus flag to the next organizer. Federal President Frank Walter Steinmeier is also expected, who will also address words to the audience.”
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/15fyp8z/rheinische_post_meghan_will_attend_the_invictus/
So, she is going to make the IG all about her, again.
The comment in German translates as `Oh, how I'm looking forward to this load of self-aggrandizing, whirling shit that Madame Hotspot Sucker will no doubt spout.' T he clue was `scheisse'.
I have to confess that I saw and did enjoy L.A.Law. but have never seen Suits. Do lawyers role around in the sheets with their para-legals and the like? Let me put it this way: I have been struck by this rather sad fact that far too many lawyers aged about thirty marry their fifty year old typist. By the time the lawyer is fifty (and still childless) at which age he should (as it were) be surfing along in his career his now seventy year old wife is nagging for him to retire. The hot girls in the lawyers office (I noticed) are far more likely to take up with the successful client, property developers and the like. Lawyers are not at least to their staff glamorous or attractive.
Back to St Paul's: one day a few years ago I was passing when on the steps of the church I observed a group of about thirty Japanese schoolgirls in their sailor-uniforms lined up in three rows. I understand American children do not wear school-uniforms and I cannot imagine British children achieving such unanimity of effect or composure. Charming. Konichiwa.
They have been bandwaggoning again. Thet both look very happy. She has a new dress and is thin.
What bothered me: The youngsters behind it seem to be very concerned with being noticed and are OTT thrilled to talk to the duo. The approach seems to be that the online world must be made safe and positive (authoritarian control), and that my problems can be solved by changing and controlling others. (I do like the idea of guidance on how to engage without being toxic because I think a lot of the online abuse is caused by thoughtlessness.) Teaching kids that bad stuff happens and there are bad people in life, so buckle up and develop resilience and wise judgment, and how to deal with difficult emotions yourself may be of better use for the young.
Meanwhile, a source close to the Archetypes production says the couple was not set up for success on Spotify: "They were given no formal lay of the land to kick things off, so they were already on unsteady footing even before the ink was dry."
Though Archewell Audio produced just 12 episodes of Archetypes for Spotfiy, the source noted, they "have a lot of ideas and did pitch them," but said there was too much red tape between Spotify and the Sussexes. "Things moved very slowly on both ends."
https://people.com/meghan-markle-prince-harry-growing-pains-showbiz-hollywood-loves-comeback-exclusive-7568141
It is all Spotify's fault!
I think experienced professionals in Hollywood will not be impressed. Some A-listers and top movie makers grafted for years and faced endless obstacles before they were successful.
PR Divorce. my guess partly a pr move. lots of hollywood types do it. are they or aren’t together? usually happens near the release of a book or movie or new show. now we have M and H putting on a “brave face” (or what even face the plastic surgery produces) teaming up at a invictus I’m guessing more a netflix content. a surprise visit to England ahead of the anniversary of granny’s death (complete with cameras catching the low curtsy) then off to invictus to honor themselves i mean the veterans. she’s gonna moderate a dinner. should i have chicken or beef? M could you help with this discussion? am i the other one excited by all of this. it’s a great distraction 😉
Thanks for the YouTube link to Suits, 'Rachel Zane legal superhero'. What a lot of codswallop, 'leval superhero'. That promotion nonsense looked like the MM show. She doesn't half fancy herself! I lasted just under 3 minutes.
Meghan Markle ‘feels’ Kate Middleton ‘got away with’ mistreating her: source
Still beating the same dead horse.
————-
They’re in the press again posing together to announce an Archwell donation. Both dressed in beige, signaling unity and a willingness to merch.
She is targeting Catherine and William, especially the former:
"Five years on, their apparently glacial relationship is still making headlines, and Markle believes that the Duchess of Cambridge and her husband, Prince William, 41, still haven’t taken responsibility for their hostile actions.
“Meghan feels they’ve never been held accountable for the way they treated her when she was part of the royals, have never apologized and have seemingly got away with it,” an unnamed source dished, according to the Mirror.
The star of the suddenly record-setting TV series “Suits” is also allegedly shocked at the lack of criticism of the Prince and Princess of Wales."
"Another insider added that Markle was “convinced” the public would be on her side regarding the feud with the Firm."
“This isn’t how she envisioned things would turn out, but Meghan knows the truth and will tell anyone who will listen that Kate had an edge [over] her.”
Scroll down ... skippy has republished all the 'London PR Anon messages', including a few later ones that I had not read. It is intriguing stuff, especially as it contains information that was only published in the tabloids and books much later, especially about their treatment of staff. Note that all the messages were sent pre Megxit.
I perhaps do not understand American politics but how could a woman married to the fifth in line to the British throne (given that unfortunate business in 1776) become an American President? Were she divorced that would be a different matter but a divorced Duchess has little status.
American voters have little to fear from Candidate Markle. Her woke politics are very 'du jour' in the leftist wing of the Democratic Party, and she's got name recognition, but that name is increasingly toxic. Hollywood types are overwhelmingly liberal and a lot of high-profile actors will stump for whichever Democratic candidate they favor. Three years ago maybe, Mrs. Harry might have been a desirable 'get' for Democratic fund-raising dinners, but everyone has had a real good look at her in operation outside the RF and it's safe to say the sparkle is off Sparkle Markle. Her egotistical word-salad isn't even very uncommon within either Hollywood or politics, but the art of politics is the art of getting along with people, even your enemies to a degree, and Harry's wife is not equipped. Such a polarizing and unlikeable figure isn't going to get anywhere in party politics. There are tons of difficult personalities working in politics, but they've been slugging away at it for years. Harry's wife has zero record of ANY political involvement, campaign volunteering or any background in poly-sci. Unless she's counting failing the foreign service exam as 'political experience'. At last check she was not even a registered member of the Democratic Party. I mean, c'mon Mugsy--make that modicum of effort at least if you want to be President or you won't be able to vote for yourself.
Her marital status to a member of the British Royal family would be a sticky wicket. It's unprecedented to have a First Spouse be the child of a foreign head of state. The last British-born First Lady was Louisa Adams, wife of John Quincy, President #5. I don't know if having a British-born wife was a political detriment--he won the Presidency after all--but I would assume that his wife was questioned about her loyalties both by the public and by government officials. The conflict with England was only in the very recent past at that point. As far as I can determine, there is no constitutional hindrance to someone running for President who is married to a foreign national, even a King's son. There are very few codified stipulations for Presidential candidates. But her marriage and her use by association of a title of nobility bestowed by a foreign power would CERTAINLY be a centerpiece of the opposition's objections to her.
“Meghan feels they’ve never been held accountable for the way they treated her when she was part of the royals, have never apologized and have seemingly got away with it,” an unnamed source dished, according to the Mirror.
--------------
This sounds to me terribly like projection.
Harry's wife must have a shedful of photographs of herself with various men on yachts she doesn't want to have see the light of day. Her grandiose blatherings about going into politics are more Narc fantasia from her. I don't understand the appeal to her at all--American politics are much of the same stultifyingly dull glad-handing and photo-opping and smiling at the peasantry which characterizes the Royal public duties she flounced away from . . with none of the glamor, and only a fraction of the staff. I don't get it.
Konnichiwa back atcha. American public (meaning comprehensive in Brit lingo) school pupils as a rule do not have uniforms but in recent years many districts have embraced a 'campus wear' dress code policy which is essentially a uniform, just not as formal as those worn in the UK and Japan and parochial schoolchildren. Campus wear ensures uniformity of dress though, which is the function. Generally dark or neutral toned trousers and a long or short sleeved conservative shirt in a likewise neutral color, or in the school colors. Just plain serviceable separates that can be purchased at Wal-Mart; no need for a specialist uniform shop. My school didn't and still doesn't require a uniform, and if I'd been assigned to write an essay back then on "School Uniforms--Pro or Con?" I would have argued against them.
Then I went to Japan for six years, which is the land of uniformity. Most Japanese corporations and businesses also require some form of uniform for their adult employees. I had an attitude shift while there. I couldn't help noticing how neat and professional everyone looked, even the students. Everyone was representing the brand message of their school or organization with pride. In Japan, one's affiliation with a group is tantamount and that is where one's sense of identity is found. It is a cultural expectation as well as a personal goal to represent one's group--class, school, company--with pride to the utmost of one's abilities. Being property dressed is the foundational block everything else builds upon. And it simplifies life as there is never any question about what one will wear for the day. Fall/winter uniform; spring/Summer uniform and gym uniform . . depending on the season and the activity at hand. Kids can dress their own way on the weekends but during the week they wear their 'work clothes'--their school uniform. I became a convert. Individuals have creative ways of finding small touches that assert their individuality . . the color or design of a hair clip, or an insouciant knot on the regulation scarf, etc.
Japanese people absolutely love taking pictures and are pros, so I'm not surprised. Those girls had dozen of hours of practice at taking class trip photos. Bunny ears/"Peace" optional but preferred. :)
Poor chap! (Sarcasm)
Re the constant blaming of others: besides the forgetfulness, narcs also behave as if they see life through lenses that have completely different refractive index from anyone else. It's so extreme that any view of their own behaviour and attitudes is turned 180deg. onto others.
They live in a world of strange physics.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65-RFQwE-ps
Starts @42 minutes
JuicyScoop podcast
Mr. Todger smiling while seated next to Mrs. Todger: He's a way better actor than she could ever hope to be.
the sparse areas on his scalp are the places they tried to take grafts for his hair transplant.
This statement is why * will never succeed in Hollywood as an actor or producer. She will keep this dialogue going in her head and in the press for years and years because she wants retribution for perceived slights. Anyone who blocks * from attaining her goals is an enemy and deserves to be treated as such. No one wants to work with a troublesome, embittered narc when there are countless other talented individuals in the business.
Twit and twat don’t realize that people worldwide observe the duty and dignified behaviors of PPoW and then observe H/M chaotic,self-serving behaviors. The Royals have nothing to apologize for and * is a proven liar. Actions speak louder than words.
Yes! It sounds like typical Jungian shadow projection.
She is the one who owes an apology to everyone. But she can never acknowledge that, and that is perhaps the key to her undoing.
That he goes along with this, at the expense of his family, friends, country is tragic.
-----
I see they have gone back to manipulating youngsters who are desperate to be noticed, and appearing as a duo. This is like their behaviour in their first year or so after Megxit. Other than IG and polo in Singapore, I wonder what other 'royal' appearances they will manage to make happen, trying to manipulate and influence their target demographic.
What do you think of this tea? Supposedly she sent Kirsten Stewart a bunch of flowers (details given) to thank her when she was nominated for an Oscar for portraying Diana (her mother-in-law she claimed).
She refers to Diana as HRH Princess Diana, which is the incorrect title, so it sounds like her.
Using a scalpel the surgeon removes a piece of the scalp, usually from the back of the head, 6 to 10 inches long.
Where the scalp was removed is closed with stitches.
The scalp is separated into smaller pieces, maybe up to 2,000 pieces.
Using a needle or blade the surgeon makes small holes in the scalp where the hair will be transplanted.
Hairs are inserted from the scalp into the holes.
The surgical sites are covered with bandages/gauze.
IMO, Mrs. Todger is physically violent, and abuses Mr. Todger. I still think she beaned him with a heavy object.
I'd bet $$$ Mr. Todger is covered in black and blue marks.
The DM article shows a young, naive girl all excited at getting a call from the duo. They apparently made surprise calls to young leaders - not sure who they are or what they do but they look very young. The thing is that they cannot reach mature adults as they wouldn't generally fall for their claptrap.
Note that the doucheass is wearing beige yet again when she complained that the BRF wouldn't allow her to wear brighter colours. I remember a blue, red and who can forget the visit to Merseyside with * dressed in red and purple, cosplaying Diana and with the disappearing bump.
Re the young leaders, when talking to one 'Prince Harry said: 'Thank you for everything that you do. Our kids especially are incredibly grateful.'' I'm sure a 4 year old and a 2 year old were 'incredibly grateful', especially as they must appreciate that the youth-led projects are 'designed to help make the digital world less toxic for young people'.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12366729/Snuggled-love-seat-Harry-Meghan-beam-united-surprise-calls-young-people-public-appearance-weeks.html
`It can't be the morf - it must be the mahses' (ie not moth but mice')
Today, that voice is only to be heard in old B&W British films - think of the station buffet conversation in Brief Encounter (1945)
One executive at WME is alleged to have remarked, "It will be impossible to work with her. The woman has an insane desire to be ugly with someone. It makes her feel worthy about herself."
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/15gjj5i/from_quora_benjamin_smallbrook/
Faux and Sue (42) Bingo!
Bound together in acrimony
Together, forever
just wait and see
Beige, neige
lacking in colour
Desperate attempt
from dull and duller
Ringed pigeon neck
adipose nose
She will cause trouble
wherever she goes…
@WildBoar
Ah, the inimitable Joyce Carey
wonderful, as was the music
Rachmaninoff
“When Titanic sank beneath the waves the stoic band played on with dignity.
There is a lesson there for H&M.”
“ The evidence of Harry's lack of intelligence is piling up faster than pizza boxes in Lizzo's hotel room. She is a manipulator and has realized that she has the equivalent of a cat and a laser pointer. ”
It has long been rumoured that Sophie and Justin were separated since before the before last election in 2018.
Sophie is rumoured to have sought greener pastures while Justin's sexual preferences have been questioned.
The big difference between the two couples is that the Trudeau's children are unquestionably real.
Lady Colin Campbell's latest tea.
Hmmm, does this mean that the tots are truly Harry's ?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-12370035/JAN-MOIR-Im-relieved-Harry-Meghans-carousel-caressing-halted-does-make-fear-them.html
The trip is believed to be the Duke of Sussex’s first to Japan since he quit his royal duties in March 2020.
https://archive.ph/2023.08.03-124834/https://japannews.yomiuri.co.jp/world/europe/20230803-127257/
What is this about? Reverting back to doing 'royal engagements'?
I did not watch this video, but here is the tea: It is hapless who lives in LA (where?). And hapless cannot believe that they need two nannies when him and his brother got along just fine with just one!
The rumours of separation and divorce will not go away.
"In today's tea serving, Lady C says the turning point for Harry was when Meghan pushed him to release Spare 2 weeks b4 the coronation. She said, to his credit, he flat out refused and apparently that was when he started to realize she was not the person he thought she was. I think it also showed him she was never gonna give up fighting his family and he had enough. That last sentence is my hot take, not Lady C's."
"Lady C is saying that KC is talking to someone in parliament regarding a Grifter divorce - let´s see.'
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/15hacig/tea_from_juicy_scoop_they_are_living_separately/
@Sandie, thank you for the Reddit link with the WME tea. That is chilling info. If ILBW is too toxic for one of the famously tough Emanuels, she must be a nightmare to deal with.
I took a look at the recent NY Post story about Ms. Todger's dissatisfaction with the Princess of Wales. The comments are almost 100% anti-Todger. There is, however, a commenter called Guest Speaker, who some think is *. Whoever Guest Speaker is, she or he is completely unhinged in her resentment of the PofW. Her/his comments are not the products of a healthy mind. She/he gets a lot of guff from the others on the thread.
Lady C. has claimed that Todgers were booted out of Frogmore Cottage, because the RF security team deemed the Todgers a security threat to the Wales family, for whatever reason. Could it be because ILBW is completely nuts, or Todger's Taliban boasts?
Go down memory lane with `Napoleon IV' -` They're coming to take me away ...', a discussion on *'s state of mind.
What caught my eye is that one of the comments draws attention to something from Celt:
@Araunah777
3 days ago
HG, Celt has a video called "when meghan was removed". She says that the Queen asked for a meeting with HW and she refused. Something happened and the Queen had two armed guards take HW's rings back. The engagement ring and the Welsh gold band. Allegedly the diamonds that belonged to Diana were removed and replaced. There is video of her being escorted out sans rings. It is being surmised that THIS is what Harry keeps insisting on an apology for. Would love a video on this.
I haven't been able to find this video - perhaps it was deemed too incendiary and has been taken down. Perhaps ERII had a risk assessment done about what * might do in the event of divorce - namely switch the diamond and substitute inferior stone, then make a killing by flogging them. Ditto for the Welsh gold.
The gold has doubtless its own profile of other elements within in, such that it can be traced back to the mine it came from, perhaps even to the very vein. Welsh gold occurs now in minute quantities and is very precious. A mine is reopened each time a royal wedding ring has to be made. That from her wedding ring also could command an exorbitant price on the black market. I certainly wouldn't put it past her to try it.
"Ms Markle's ring has been fashioned from a piece of Welsh Gold, gifted by Her Majesty The Queen.”
See https://www.walesonline.co.uk/whats-on/whats-on-news/reason-welsh-gold-used-royal-14679181
It’d have be sickening if she’d made of with it and the diamonds.
SecondhandCoke
Join
Divorce is imminent
I don't post often-- usually just put my tea in the comments. But from what I hear, there is now officially a legal inquiry about the custody of the children and that the divorce is an inevitability. I had originally said March-May. Now I'm saying there'll be an announcement by the end of this year.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/15h6xe9/divorce_is_imminent/
I took a look at the recent NY Post story about Ms. Todger's dissatisfaction with the Princess of Wales. The comments are almost 100% anti-Todger. There is, however, a commenter called Guest Speaker, who some think is *. Whoever Guest Speaker is, she or he is completely unhinged in her resentment of the Po
YES, SO MANY comments from Guest Speaker!! Replying to just about all of the oldest negative Meghan comments in that thread.
These stand out so far:
NinjaAccountant
1d ago
MeAgain appears to be a narcissist.
Reply
26
Share
Guest Speaker
1d ago
You have no clue. Using psych terms to name call. The name is MEGHAN
Guest Speaker
1d ago
Kate worked on a yacht over a summer. It's all documented. MEGHAN did not work on a yacht. You don't like her and then you say how she thinks. Makes no sense.
Sinners on SMM are pretty sure that `Guest Speaker' in the ILBW herself, to judge by her style and content.
ILBW is probably deemed a existential threat to the Cambridges (my guess is she may spar Wm in hope of marrying him... Yep, she's stark staring raving mad. Totally psychotic)
"Over a four-month period, she worked as a deckhand at the Ocean Village Marina in Southampton. One of the skippers Kate worked under at the time, Cal Tomlinson, spoke to author Katie Nicholl for her biography Kate: The Future Queen. He said: 'It was back-breaking work."
The only time TBW has been on a yacht, it was 100% for leisure and entertainment.
Her birthday dinner date ... her forging ahead, him trailing behind like the spare he is!
https://archive.ph/2023.08.03-235503/https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12370991/EXCLUSIVE-Meghan-Markles-birthday-date-night-Prince-Harry-Smiling-Duchess-Sussex-leaves-trendy-Montecito-restaurant-celebrate-turning-42-couples-latest-loved-display.html
There is no loved up display in the photographs. There is no interaction between them at all. It is so marked because of the intense PDA in their earlier relationship.
The Duchess of Sussex, who will celebrate her 42nd birthday Friday, has a handle called @ meghan which already has 2,420 followers — despite the fact she has never actually posted anything."
https://archive.ph/2023.08.03-210758/https://pagesix.com/2023/08/03/meghan-markle-secures-new-instagram-handle-to-get-ready-for-comeback/
Just a thought. I wonder if she thought she was entitled to set the date for the publication of Spare, because she was the one who actually wrote most of it. A lot of what was in the book about herself, and in particular, Catherine, didn't seem at all likely to have come from Harry's observations. Men are often woefully oblivious to tensions between female family members.
--------
No man writes about lip gloss.
It seems incontestable that Harry’s wife is a straight up psychopath. I really do fully believe the eyelash glue incident in college. It’s just so pointedly specific, and that is not a hazing prank in the main stream that I think a lot of people would think to do. We know she’s fond of lashes, and we also have photographic evidence that she doesn’t know how to apply them well. I can also believe that all through the engagement and the first months of their marriage, she stalked Catherine and the children around Kensington. It’s rather disturbing that she somehow found out George’s RPO security handle; how might that have happened? I can’t believe that the two families were ever transported together for her to innocently overhear it’s usage. It seems very likely that she had a mole on the Cambridge’s staff… possibly someone she coerced. Or it’s possible that William might have told Harry at one point. I can’t believe that he ever would have spoken to Harry’s wife about anything really. I don’t think William gave her the time of day after the illegal photograph incident a year before the engagement. A person who has no boundaries, is hell-bent on revenge and respects no one, not even a crowned sovereign head of state or any protocols attaching to the royal family is very dangerous.
I remember Catherine’s stint crewing on yachts; It was one of the things she threw herself into to keep busy after William broke up with her. It seems that Guest Speaker is unable to distinguish between back-breaking work and working on one’s back. I’m certain all the filthy rumors about Harry’s wife are true. She’s a bona fide psycho who feels most at home on a floating bordello.
I guess if there are actual children in Montecito for the king of the United Kingdom to gain custody of, we might expect to see them at future royal events. Wouldn’t that be a turn up?
---------
I think so. That would be right up her alley.
There were some talk that 1 of Catherine's staff who was abruptly let go of the day the woman came back from her honeymoon Was someone who MM had tricked into giving her information about Catherine. Or it was possible the woman was willingly colluding with Mm.
That would fit in with Mm's mo of E. being a mole.
I think the Harkles had to have had a mole, maybe more than one, because otherwise how would they know so much about the Wales's calendar items.
What is Black and White
and dread all over?
Daily Mare
I suspected Euge of being the mole in earlier days, She was acquainted with a lot of the same people, and Ivy Cott is just a stone’s throw from Nott Cott. Even after the Harkles allegedly moved into Froggy Cott, The two couples may have seen quite a lot of each other with E.’s parents at Royal Lodge. E. Stayed with them for months when expecting the baby in order to make a Covid pod. Who knows what kind of phone calls and zoom calls went on… Though call me tin hat crazy, but I would need some convincing to believe that the Harkles ever spent any time at Froggy Cott. I believe it was renovated and is now a nice family home though the dispensation of the monies for its renovations seem to be quite opaque. But I don’t think they ever wanted to be in Windsor If they couldn’t have the castle or Frogmore House all to themselves. Being sent to Windsor was being sent to Coventry, and it was definitely a statement on the part of the Queen. Any sane person would be happy with a grade 2 listed fully restored five bedroom Georgian cottage Inn an an historic town with Harry’s gran just up the road. But Froggy Cott wasn’t nearly grand enough for them selves, and I fully believe they refused to stay there because their egos were offended. During the Covid shut downs they could just as easily zoom with E. From Soho House.
Eugenie and the whole family are too far removed from the heart of the court to know anything intimate about them Waleses, But I suppose the court circular is easy enough to get it. I just don’t see what being a stool pigeon oils profit E. She’s got her hands full with a new baby and a toddler and apparently is living in Portugal half the year. Apart from her attendance at the coronation, notice how very little we see or hear anything about the Brooksbanks anymore. I just don’t know why anyone in their right mind would add aid and abet the toxic grifters.
As for Lady C’s report on the King seeking the advice of Parliament about child custody, I don’t buy it.
I checked ©Lightworkers. All I could find was 'Lightworkers Media is an American Christian media and film production company helmed by President Roma Downey and her husband Mark Burnett and owned by MGM Holdings through MGM Television.' MGM Holdings - is * hoping to revive her acting career?
Not to know at this stage what the law says about what he may/may not do would be foolish.
BTW: `Working girl' used to be a euphemism for `common prostitute'(especially if `working' was said in a knowing way). I think we can safely say, that * `worked' her passage aboard.
---
I was once on the Ostend-Dover ferry and couldn't help overhearing two male teachers (with a school party) chatting to a couple of girls of dubious demeanour.
`We did work in Wisbech,' they said. `but we didn't like it there - the men were so rough...'
The schoolkids were agog.
The ‘House’ is in Recess,
nobody ‘home’
I doubt Charles is seeking
advice from Parliament during
his Scottish sojourn.
And who is escorting her – Harry (who looks as if he’s playing gooseberry) or the other bloke?
If she wore an orange bathing cap she could go to the Met Gala as a zebra crossing. https://www.motoringresearch.com/advice/pedestrian-crossing-types-explained/ .
Ms. Todger's birthday dress reminded me of a black & white version of the old red-and-white barber's poles.
She can look quite attractive, but she goes more for the 'look at me' vibe than the 'I feel pretty' vibe.
I'm not buying the KCIII is looking into getting custody of the children. IMO Lady C. is trolling Mrs. Todger at the behest of someone at the Palace to put some mental/emotional pressure on Mrs. Todger, i.e., the question of the "children" is going to become a matter of State.
As for the King speaking to parliament about custody of the children ... I agree with Rebecca and do not believe this. The term 'parliament' is so vague, and the whole issue about custody of grandchildren comes from letters patent issued a long time ago. The king does not require any advice or permission from politicians to exercise the authority given to him by letters patent. If he wants advice, he would speak to the PM in their private sessions. Perhaps hapless has contacted someone in government for advice as he is too thick to understand the letters patent!
No way is she ever letting those children even visit the UK if she is not with them - not ever, under any circumstances. Of course, once they come of age, she loses control of them. Even if he does leave her, divorce her, he will have to reside in the LA area to be able to see his children, and she would make it very difficult for him. He does frequently go away (with or without TBW) and leave his children at home, but if he is awake enough to leave her then he is awake enough to know that the civilized co-parenting arrangement his parents had is not possible with TBW.
I do find it very interesting that all traces of love bombing and over-the-top, or any at all, PDA are gone. To me, it is very obvious.
*'s agent, Ari Emanuel, is no friend of the RF, & he was behind the quick cancellation of Kanye West. He might try to cancel the RF. I doubt anyone in the RF wants a 'King Ralph' scenario. (That movie is allegedly a favorite of *) The UK could have a 'King Archie.' A king who knows little about his realm, & whose parents have declared it a racist & abusive hell hole. I just can't see KCIII signing off on that.
That is the great comment I read in DailyMail article discussing the (seeming) upcoming divorce of the Sussex duo.
1. Wouldn't that be rip-roaring fun if KCIII proclaimed a new annual holiday to mark the divorce day of the Markles? It would never happen of course, but a girl can dream, can't she?
2. But thinking further, if that divorce causes the Duke of Todger to return permanently to the U.K., it would be cause for sober reflection/mournfulness/wariness/revulsion/anger on the part of many of KCIII's subjects, so they might have to have another bank holiday in order to gird their loins for the prodigal son's return
"...this all reeks of a bigger set up I still dont think she want custody of the "kids" so how does she extract herself from this and still look good..."
Your whole post was spot on, I think.
"...this all reeks of a bigger set up I still dont think she want custody of the "kids" so how does she extract herself from this and still look good..."
Your whole post was spot on, I think.
Initial Child Custody Jurisdiction in the US
The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) governs child custody matters in the USA. The children’s custody is determined based on the following factors:
Where a child has resided in the past six months.
Home state of the child
Under US law, removing or abducting a child from the custody of a parent is considered a serious crime and can result in imprisonment for up to 25 years.
The historical case of Chafin v. Chafin, 568 US (2013), in which the Chief Justice invoked the Hague Convention, awarded custody to the father, a US citizen, and ordered the child to be returned pursuant to this treaty.
Given how radioactive Harry has become to a majority of UK citizens, I would think he might prefer to stay in California if he were to divorce her.
Mr. Todger, in case of divorce, would have to make a public apology about the children being non-existent, and the reason he went along was because he was being blackmailed, and he was protecting himself from public humiliation. He is so very very sorry for his complicitness in perpetuating a lie, and for all the hurt and damage he has caused. He knows forgiveness will be very difficult. He will attempt to make amends by moving to Botswana, Africa and working with children. He hopes that he will someday redeem himself as he works to make amends to his God, to his Family, and to his Nation.
Good point re DNA testing the children but would Harry give his consent? If not, I'm not sure the RF would be willing/able to take DNA samples behind his back. They shouldn't have any compunction but they might have. They'd also need *'s DNA for comparison. And what if they find out that * or H or both are not the parents of the child/ children? The process would be stirring up a hornet's nest, I think.
https://pagesix.com/2023/08/04/how-meghan-markle-celebrated-her-42nd-birthday-without-prince-harry/?_ga=2.253488521.1645520069.1690210483-1500636110.1654556846&_gl=1*ahsfnh*_ga*MTUwMDYzNjExMC4xNjU0NTU2ODQ2*_ga_0DZ7LHF5PZ*MTY5MTE5MTQ3NS4zOTkuMS4xNjkxMTkxNjI2LjAuMC4w
Meghan Markle 'makes the decisions and runs the household': Friend says the 'dynamic works for her and Prince Harry' who is 'embracing the life he has' in California - where the Duke is a 'beer and steak-and-potato' man
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12374079/Meghan-Markle-makes-decisions-runs-household-Prince-Harry-embracing-life-California.html
I am not an expert in immigration law, but I wonder if Harry would be permitted to stay in the United States indefinitely if he divorces his American wife. There are all kinds of hoops to jump through when one is a foreign national, even one married to an American is not have carte blanche to stay in the country without any restrictions. What the authorities are looking for is a guaranteed means of economic support and domicile. Also conduct which is an accord with the laws of the state of California, which harry has already breached due to self admitted use of narcotics. The process to become a naturalized citizen is lengthy, And even a marriage to a citizen Is not enough to ensure a green card and permanent residency. Unless BetterUp Is willing to sponsor his visa and accept all responsibility for his conduct while in the country, He may have to go home if the spousal visa is no longer valid. The requirements for a permanent green card are pretty stringent, and to acquire naturalized citizenship requires seven years of residency with green card status, as well as attendance at classes devised to prepare a candidate for the citizenship test. Harry may be enjoying his playtime at Disneyland, but he has evidence no intention to pursue American citizenship which would allow him to remain indefinitely without being married to her. He is the son of an allied head of state, but since he performs zero diplomatic function in the US on behalf of the United Kingdom, I don’t see how he would be eligible for a diplomatic visa in perpetuity. He is not representing the Crown. If she’s in fact run through all of his money and their corporate deals have tanked, and his father has disowned him and there aren’t any more corporate deals forthcoming… He would fail in the “viable means of support” category. His presence here is a big mess, not only for king Charles and the royal family and to the taxpayers of United Kingdom, but also for the US state department. Homeland security might be involved as well, given the couples recent allegation of a near fatal incident in New York City. I think the best outcome for Harry is to divorce the witch and go home to face the music. He is a citizen of the United Kingdom and he needs to go back there and be sorted out in his own country.
I am not an expert in immigration law, but I wonder if Harry would be permitted to stay in the United States indefinitely if he divorces his American wife. There are all kinds of hoops to jump through when one is a foreign national, even one married to an American is not have carte blanche to stay in the country without any restrictions. What the authorities are looking for is a guaranteed means of economic support and domicile. Also conduct which is an accord with the laws of the state of California, which harry has already breached due to self admitted use of narcotics. The process to become a naturalized citizen is lengthy, And even a marriage to a citizen Is not enough to ensure a green card and permanent residency. Unless BetterUp Is willing to sponsor his visa and accept all responsibility for his conduct while in the country, He may have to go home if the spousal visa is no longer valid. The requirements for a permanent green card are pretty stringent, and to acquire naturalized citizenship requires seven years of residency with green card status, as well as attendance at classes devised to prepare a candidate for the citizenship test. Harry may be enjoying his playtime at Disneyland, but he has evidence no intention to pursue American citizenship which would allow him to remain indefinitely without being married to her. He is the son of an allied head of state, but since he performs zero diplomatic function in the US on behalf of the United Kingdom, I don’t see how he would be eligible for a diplomatic visa in perpetuity. He is not representing the Crown. If she’s in fact run through all of his money and their corporate deals have tanked, and his father has disowned him and there aren’t any more corporate deals forthcoming… He would fail in the “viable means of support” category. His presence here is a big mess, not only for king Charles and the royal family and to the taxpayers of United Kingdom, but also for the US state department. Homeland security might be involved as well, given the couples recent allegation of a near fatal incident in New York City. I think the best outcome for Harry is to divorce the witch and go home to face the music. He is a citizen of the United Kingdom and he needs to go back there and be sorted out in his own country.
Custody of children across state boundaries is a tricky matter in any case but particularly difficult here. As things stand, nobody knows for certain whose biological children they are (H seems to believe they're his but without DNA even he can't know for sure - only * knows for certain whether or not she's the gestational mother.) Where were they really born? After all we don't think there's an American record of Archie's birth in UK. Did she `abduct' him to Canada? Was he born in thee US and smuggled into UK? (We did wonder about that)
o say nothing of political implications.
I think we can assume the RF knows much more about it than we do
It's a right warming pan of worms. My fear is that *'s state of mind is such that she could easily take the line `If I can't have them, nobody can' and we all know where that can lead.
Yet again, CRIII is on the horns of a dilemma.
Allegedly, of course.
Apparently the PoW did not want the drama llama anywhere near them during this time.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/15iiq3c/harry_was_invitedalone/
PRINCE Harry and wife Meghan have befriended movie star John Travolta, we can reveal.
It comes as the couple have reportedly fallen out with other high profile pals including David and Victoria Beckham.
The US-based royals have spent time with Look Who’s Talking and Pulp Fiction star Travolta at celebrity hangout The Beverly Hills Hotel in Los Angeles.
Travolta, 69, who shot to fame in hit 1977 boogie drama Saturday Night Fever, famously danced with Harry's mother Princess Diana at a White House gala dinner in 1985.
They danced for 15 minutes to songs including You’re the One That I Want — his 1978 Grease film musical hit with Olivia Newton-John — in front of the Press, fellow star Clint Eastwood and US President Ronald Reagan.
Travolta later said it was “one of the highlights of my life”.
The screen idol, a member of controversial religion Scientology, socialised with Harry and Meghan at the hotel’s ultra-VIP Polo Lounge where its trademark salad can cost £1,500.
The trio shared food and drinks at a party for the couple’s Archewell foundation hosted by the hotel.
Sources insist Harry and Meghan are not Scientologists but an insider said: “They all got on extremely well.”
Harry, who trashed his family in memoir Spare, flies to Singapore and Tokyo without her later this month for his charity Sentebale.
They will attend the Invictus Games in Germany together next month — but have not been invited to any private or public events with the rest of the Royal Family to mark the year’s passing of Queen Elizabeth II on September 8.
Instead, Harry and Meghan — who lost their £16million Spotify deal this year — will open the games for wounded soldiers just 24 hours later without a stop in the UK.
Meanwhile, sources say they have formed a new “California Court” of pals, which includes model Kelly Zajfen and cosmetics tycoon Victoria Jackson — plus they are regular house guests of neighbour Oprah Winfrey.
They are said to remain “very close friends” with Oprah, who two-and-a-half years ago carried out the bombshell interview in which the couple claimed an unnamed royal had made comments about the colour of their unborn child.
The meet-up with Travolta is understood to be one of the few times they have ventured from their home for a night in LA, despite living in California for more than three years.
Insiders add that the couple are “focused on working and enjoying time out with friends”.
But security remains their main focus as Harry is also locked in a battle with the British Government over his protection arrangements when he visits the UK.
Such is their fear that security guards sit at the next table when they eat at San Ysidro - a luxurious resort and ranch just two miles from their home.
A local said: “Everyone thinks it’s weird as San Ysidro is the most exclusive place around and yet their security are at the next table keeping an eye on them.”
One California music great — who did not want The Sun to name him — told a pal he was shocked to see guards helping Harry fill his car up with petrol as “guns are not in keeping with the vibe”.
https://archive.ph/2023.08.04-205028/https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/23359057/harry-meghan-friends-john-travolta/
----
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Ashley-Cooper,_10th_Earl_of_Shaftesbury
This is the sorry tale of an English aristocrat who disappeared in 2004, aged 66, murdered by his 3rd wife (in her early 40s) and her brother. I'll leave you to draw any parallels.
plus they are regular house guests of neighbour Oprah Winfrey.'
Come again? They regularly stay with O despite being neighbours?
`
Without knowing anything, my impression from Lady C.'s comments was that KCIII was very discreetly 'sounding' out issues regarding the children in case of divorce. The RF seems to do this sort of thing by just picking up the phone, & often through intermediaries, or at least that's my impression. I felt Lady C. was warning ILBW that the RF was dotting all its i's & crossing all its t's in the event of a divorce.
If * wants an idea of what the RF will give to her in a divorce, she should look at Sarah Ferguson's divorce settlement, which was pretty meagre when compared to other divorcees who married into very wealthy UK families. Sarah,(& her children), has always been loyal to the monarchy, which is probably why they have never discarded her completely. * will have more of a Wallis Simpson relationship with the RF, frozen out completely, is my guess.
- H voluntarily renouncing his entire royal status and all his privileges, not just the Dukedom but the princely status as well. That'd go a long way towards scuppering *. If he doesn't become a commoner, he can wave goodbye to his hope of returning to the bosom of his family.
-Plain Mr H Mountbatten Windsor changes his surname by deed poll to a single-barrelled with no royal connotations. `Smith' will do.
- He undergoes an intensive course of cleaning up with ref to drugs and booze.
- He undergoes a de-programming akin to that used for cult followers.
- Limited contact with outside world; none with ILBW
- Can see his children, under supervision
- takes a low-grade manual job, with appropriate remuneration, under close supervision where he has no direct contact with the public, such a warehouseman. Has to try living on his wages
and so on, until he accepts that his conduct must change and does something about it.
Pure speculation of course.
If * wants an idea of what the RF will give to her in a divorce,
BRF vs *. The BRF will dig deep into their pocket if they have to. They can afford expensive lawyers. *, not so much.
An actress who married a royal, continued her career, and has recently taken on two royal patronages (not funded at all by the royal family or taxpayers). She gets on very well with all the royals, who have been very good to her.
The problem with TBW has always been her. Unless she radically and fundamentally changes herself, I don't see her ever forming such good relationships with a kind and thoughtful family that the royal family is.
As for having friends ... the worst of human beings have friends, partners, children. (They did not dine alone for her birthday. Supposedly Heather her pilates friend and her husband dined with them.)
Anon ...
Tom Bower has all of the details about the Beckham v Sussex fallout. The Beckham even loaned their Beverly Hills mansion to Meghan before the wedding! Details on the fashion freebies and favours demanded, the delicious fact that what Meghan wore didn't sell, Harry refusing to meet David in Australia when he flew in to support Invictus...
This is amazing stuff. Of course, he's currently writing a biography of David Beckham so his sources will be impeccable.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/23364397/meghan-ordered-prince-harry-snub-david-beckham/
Plant ...
Thanks! I think we knew or suspected this is how it went down. I’m glad it’s confirmed that Meghan wearing an item had little effect on product sales. Also glad they confirm most of the “sold out” products involved very small quantities. Very awkward having this come out as she’s hustling for new deals. Also, wow, that Australian tour was even more of a disaster than I thought.
A prior anon suggested that their desperate flight from the family was motivated by a general sense of failure. I feel like that’s correct. The press was hyping them so much that people thought they were wildly successful, but all that hype was not reflected in polling number, product sales, or charity donations, as many of us pointed out at the time.
Now it’s coming out that their “wins” (because Harry getting Beckham to the Invictus games was a huge win for him at the time) were not all that either.
https://anonymoushouseplantfan.tumblr.com/
-----
Plant, what's the tea on younger woman Just H was linked to in SF back in the day? Are they still together?
She was a BetterUp employee. There are two versions about what happened next. In one version, it was an affair that ran its course till Meghan found out and the woman moved on. In the second version, Harry SA'd her and BetterUp cleaned it up with a NDA and a payoff/settlement.
-----
Fabricated or gossip with some truth to it?
The royal family's problem with the children is always going to be are they or are they not. There may be no way to avoid an international scandal when the truth comes out.
Harry can give up his place in the line of succession and then the status of his children becomes irrelevant. But I don't believe he will do it volontarily, it means everything to him, without his princely status he is nothing.
Staff at California tech firm that pays Prince Harry 'seven-figure salary' turn on him as 100 of them are laid off: Workers say royal is a 'distraction' and no one knows what he actually DOES (as one suggests his responsibilities are 'zero things')
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12376965/US-life-coaching-company-staff-slam-Prince-Harry-100-employees-let-Duke-rakes-seven-figure-salary-chief-impact-officer.html
HARRY and Meghan have snapped up the rights to film a best-selling book in a Hollywood-or-bust move after the collapse of their Spotify deal.
Their first off-camera-only venture for Netflix marks a change in direction away from their personal documentaries into fiction production.
The major shift by the US-based royal couple comes amid reports their star is waning in America after Spotify dropped them.
Experts estimate it may have cost up to £3million for the romantic novel Meet Me At The Lake by former journalist turned author Carley Fortune.
It is a “love story” about a couple who meet in their 30s with echoes of the Duke and Duchess’s real-life relationship.
The novel — which shifted a whopping 37,000 copies in the first week of its release in May alone — deals with themes including childhood trauma over losing a parent in a car crash, mental health and post-natal depression.
Share
Next
EXCLUSIVE
FabulousCelebrity
'HOLLYWOOD OR BUST' Harry and Meghan will produce Netflix film after buying rights to £3m novel about parent dying in car crash
Matt WilkinsonThomas Godfrey
Published: 21:15, 5 Aug 2023Updated: 4:53, 6 Aug 2023
Share
HARRY and Meghan have snapped up the rights to film a best-selling book in a Hollywood-or-bust move after the collapse of their Spotify deal.
Their first off-camera-only venture for Netflix marks a change in direction away from their personal documentaries into fiction production.
Advertisement
Harry and Meghan are set to produce a new film for Netflix - and it will be their first off-camera-only venture, as they move into fiction
5
Harry and Meghan are set to produce a new film for Netflix - and it will be their first off-camera-only venture, as they move into fictionCredit: Getty
They have snapped up the rights to adapt best-selling romantic novel Meet Me At The Lake
5
They have snapped up the rights to adapt best-selling romantic novel Meet Me At The LakeCredit: Instagram
The major shift by the US-based royal couple comes amid reports their star is waning in America after Spotify dropped them.
Experts estimate it may have cost up to £3million for the romantic novel Meet Me At The Lake by former journalist turned author Carley Fortune.
It is a “love story” about a couple who meet in their 30s with echoes of the Duke and Duchess’s real-life relationship.
The novel — which shifted a whopping 37,000 copies in the first week of its release in May alone — deals with themes including childhood trauma over losing a parent in a car crash, mental health and post-natal depression.
It also has “steamy sex scenes” and “drug use” and is set near Toronto in Canada — where Meghan lived when she started dating Harry.
Buying the rights to the book is the first major deal the couple have scored since losing their £16million Spotify contract.
It is also the first time Archewell Productions has paid to turn a novel into a fictional drama as part of their Netflix deal reported to be £80million.
We revealed in May they will stop making royal-bashing shows for the streamer because there is “nothing left to say”.
But the new production has stalled because screenwriters in Hollywood have been on strike for more than three months.
An insider said: “The themes of the book gripped the couple and it was chosen for their first adaptation with Netflix.”
PR guru Mark Borkowski questioned why publishers Penguin Random House sold it to them.
He said: “The rights for this could have cost up to £3million.
“Although if it’s a best-seller, you wouldn’t be handing it to Harry and Meghan.
“There’s some amazing drama producers out there. Why would you give away a prize asset?
Penguin Random House published Harry’s explosive book Spare and it is thought ex-actress Meghan could have a personal connection to the Toronto-based author - which may explain how they have landed the deal.
...
Same story in DM.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are said to have bought the rights to the romantic novel Meet Me At The Lake by Carley Fortune, which experts estimate could have cost them up to £3million.
Meet Me At The Lake, which sold 37,000 copies in its first week alone, is a romantic fiction based on two people who kindle a romance with one another in their 30s - much like the Duke and Duchess themselves. It also describes the trauma faced by a character who lost a parent in a car crash as a child, and goes on to cover themes including alcohol and drug use - topics which the Prince talked about at length in his bombshell memoir Spare.
And in a nod to Meghan's past, the novel is based in Toronto, where the actress lived while filming Suits.
Do they really believe they'll have the Midas touch this time after their very mediocre exploits? They have no experience. * thinks having been an actress will make her qualified. Glad we don't have Netflix any more.
https://tinyurl.com/yckznh97
Harry can give up his place in the line of succession and then the status of his children becomes irrelevant. But I don't believe he will do it volontarily, it means everything to him, without his princely status he is nothing.
I don't think for a moment that he would give it up without a massive fight/bribe, much as I like to think it could cut through many problems.
It should reduce *'s status to plain Mrs M-W for a start.
As for the children, it'd depend on whether he is their father and, if so, whether they are legitimate in terms of the law of succession or just the latest in a very long, historical, of Royal bastards, which would be the case if they were not born of *'s body, whether they came from a surrogate or from one of H's other acquaintances.
I don't think anyone is surprised.
https://tinyurl.com/mr22ahpm
Meg on the Make
Picture it…
Montecito ‘23
Golden shower moment
shared by h and me
We’ll buy the rights
to a film I can star in
No competition
I’ll take top billing
Picture it…
Oscars ‘24
Me in gold lame
I am meghan, J’adore…
New post ... always good for a laugh!
Methinks you are being kind in saying 'mediocre pursuits'!
I think their chances of making a successful movie are close to zero. Script, funding/legalities, director, funding/legalities, acting ensemble, funding/legalities, on-site production team, funding/legalities, locations, funding/legalities, filming, funding/legalities, post-production (including music), funding/legalities, distribution, funding/legalities ... have I forgotten anything on the list of what needs to be done before you get to publicity and awards?
This is a couple who go directly to publicity and awards, over and over again. And a couple who have hired top talent, and then lost them, usually within a year, over and over again.
This is disruptive to the blog.
It is not respectful of the others.
This is disruptive to the moderators.
It is not respectful of the moderators.
Thank you for the contributions you have made in the past but, going forward, this blog does not seem to a good fit for you.
-----
Celebrity psychic and astrologer Inbaal Honigman has predicted that Meghan Markle would ‘bounce back’ professionally after Spotify ended deal with her and Prince Harry.
The Cheat Sheet quoted Inbaal as saying that Meghan’s lost deal with Spotify was of no consequence in the greater scheme of things.
“Due to the actress’s Jupiter sign, she will soon replace it with a similar or a better deal. The planet Jupiter rules luck and wealth, and in Meghan’s chart, Jupiter is in balanced Libra. Her finances always balance out, if one income goes, another arrives,” she explained.
The astrologer further says, “We can expect to see her in commercials and collaborating with large manufacturers.’
She went on to add, the time of Meghan Markle’s 2023 birthday was not without its challenges, but she would ‘bounce back bigger and brighter, as she always does.’
“Her astrological chart indicates that her indefatigable spirit burns on, and she won’t be kept down.”
-----
https://www.geo.tv/latest/503542-meghan-markle-wont-be-kept-down-will-bounce-back
My thoughts are The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly:
- The Good: I am actually impressed that they somehow pulled off a good business move by getting rights to a genuine best-seller.
- The Bad: under their stewardship and as producers, their adaptation will likely stink and tank. If they just would hire and then take the advice of experts, the film could be a huge success. However, their track record is to disregard, discard and dis-employ any experts due to their unwarranted self-confident belief in their own brilliance and "we know best" mantra, thus I envision this opus garnering crap reviews, ridicule, and in Awards Season being awarded a Razzie which the two thirsty ones, lacking shame or awareness, will show up in glitzy glamour-wear in order to accept in person.
- The Ugly: since I knew zilch about this book I typed its title into my search bar and was startled that one of the first results is "What are the trigger warnings in 'Meet Me at the Lake'?" Frankly never before in a book search have I seen 'trigger warnings' as one of the top results. I suspect that such a phrase is catnip to the Duke and Duchess and so I fear we will be in for an ugly experience where they can both go on speaking tours and relate how virtually all the below themes and trigger warnings for "Meet Me At The Lake" apply to them together or individually: cut and pasted:
"...secrets and lies, love and sacrifice, work and life balance, mental health, rebellion, grief and loss, as well as family and parenthood. Trigger warnings include death via car accident, drug use, fires, abandonment, depression, sick child, and absentee parents" - end quote -
They will be in their element when being paid big money to lecture us how these themes and ugly trigger warnings reflect their own toweringly-special and toweringly-hard lives.
Maybe I can make some coin by riding on their coattails. I will design and manufacture for in-theatre and in-home use purge-bags sporting their faces and some choice Sussex phrases such as "Not many people have asked if I'm okay" and "Expendable"
Your ability to get into the mind of, and channel, La Douchass is astounding!
You made me laugh. "Very long history of Royal bastards". I wonder if the King will give them a coat of arms of their own. You know, Harry's escutcheon with the three red escallop (for Spencer) and a Bar Sinister (for Markle)!
I would say Meet me at the Lake is based on them. The hero is Will (heir not spare). The surname is Brockbank which is pretty close to one of the York sisters husband's surnames is it not and so on. I read that it will be a Netflix movie. Would that be similar to a 'straight to video' movie. The trend is Pink with Ken (Harry) as Barbie's handbag - or maybe Harryheimer where our hero figures on how to blow up the entire establishment.
Guaranteed Mrs. Todger will commandeer any and all aspects of the production. People will be quitting and walking because Mrs. Todger simply cannot hide her nasty self. The film will be ruined.
A source tells us exclusively Saturday that the Sussexes met the “Saturday Night Fever” star “once” at the Polo Lounge inside the Beverly Hills Hotel in Los Angeles.
The group got together for the release party for Harry’s memoir, “Spare,” back in January.
The insider adds that the duke, 38, and duchess, 42, had a “very friendly encounter” with Travolta, 69, that one time but “nothing more than that.”
The Sun reported Friday that Markle and Harry had “got on extremely well” with the “Pulp Fiction” star.
Travolta had previously met the Invictus Games creator’s mother, the late Princess Diana, years ago and reportedly has said that hangout was “one of the highlights of [his] life.”
https://pagesix.com/2023/08/05/meghan-markle-prince-harry-had-friendly-encounter-with-john-travolta/
So, they were at the Polo Lounge in January, celebrating the publication of Spare. They were with a 'group' of unnamed people, so not for publicity. John Travolta happened to be there and they introduced themselves to him. Travolta was friendly (yes, I remember your mother).
If there's any truth in the reports about how he treats women, he'll soon be on s-offenders' list if he settles back here. Whether CRIII would keep it quiet (I hope not), I have no idea but I'm darn sure though that William would gladly hand him over to the law.
Do you think perhaps that deep down H is furious at his mother `abandoning' him but can't come to terms with it? So he idealises Diana but takes it out on vulnerable women who perhaps don't have any protection from some tough guy? In addition, that is, from inheriting those Spencer genes which allegedly gave the males a bad reputation?
Just speculating.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJ3yeyKPA3A
Umpteen comments, plus a reminder from Celt that we probably don't even know the half of what * had been up to, even at that stage - other jewellery `going missing' from Catherine's care.
Intriguing snippet - royal gem stones are laser marked as evidence of Royal ownership.
Don't be too alarmed at the thought of the Harkles producing a film. I don't think this will allow them to 'firm up their futures in Hollywood' as they've never produced any quality work. The storyline sounds as if it might end up being a thinly disguised story of their lives. The heroine, i.e. *, will be the main character and a fantastic person. Therefore your idea of 'in-theatre and in-home use purge-bags sporting their faces and some choice Sussex phrases such as "Not many people have asked if I'm okay" and "Expendable"' is brilliant. I could add 'authentic and organic' and 'you are loved'.
@Magatha
Meg on the make
Me in gold lame
I am meghan, J’adore…
……………
You have captured the spirit of the doucheass.
Thank you for your comment. Every little bit helps.
And it won't be a repeat experience for you so please feel free to chime back in.
The character names seem far too coincidental, eh?
I think you're right about Harry resenting his mother for abandoning him and taking it out on women. I don't think he has fully dealt with her demise. I think that the fact that * imitates his mother makes her immune to his anger because he's trying to be "good" towards his mother, so she won't leave him again.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/15jx6tm/markle_demotivational_posters_if_the_stolen/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1
At the risk of amateur analysis, my opinion is that you hit the nail on the head. It is not only her death, but the acrimonious breakdown of the marriage, separation and divorce ... Diana's behaviour contributed to all of that. It is too threatening at an unconscious level for him to face that, so he 'forgot' his childhood with her. When he did actively try to remember by providing information for his memoir, he was heavily under the influence of his wife (who can use Diana for her own benefit), so I do not think he is any closer to dealing with his anger because his mother abandoned him. He can take swipes at his father because Charles will never abandon him. Although he is angry that he is not close to his father as his brother is, it is pretty safe for him to lash out at his father. Although he says otherwise in his memoir, his father has always been there for him as a loving and attentive (safe) parent. But, if he allows himself to think about his mother abandoning him, he loses her completely ... a risk he does not face with his father.
William, I think, has the same issues, but he is able to be more mature and realistic because he has a grown-up wife who genuinely loves him, and he has strong and good family relationships, plus a public role that grounds him and thus he feels safer than his brother.
"THIS 2015 picture of Charles, the Queen, William and George was a special commission by the Post Office for a stamp sheet to mark the Queen’s 90th birthday.
Taken in the White Drawing Room at Buckingham Palace, it was vital that all the heads had to be in the correct position for the stamp.
A pile of books was needed to get George up higher. He is smiling because his mum is standing behind the photographer pulling funny faces.
It amused the Queen and the other two royals as well - Arthur Edwards"
https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/23123913/arthur-edwards-royal-photographer-prince-george-ten-years-pictures/
It is a lovely article in it's entirety, and it shows what the royal family get right and how the duo have got it so wrong. All the secrecy and fakery from the duo fuels speculation and sows the seeds of mistrust. And, started and still spearheaded by social media, the digging starts and the ugly truth behind the scenes is revealed and it all falls apart for them. The duo favour secrecy and fakery (not privacy as their mockumentary revealed) because they have something to hide; William and his family combine reasonable privacy with joyful sharing and it fosters a positive relationship with the media and public because they are genuine.
My personal opinion is that she still doesn't 'get it', and that he, much like his memories of his mother, does not see or understand that his wife has dragged him down to her level... because she is completely, blindly, in love with herself and cannot tolerate anything that threatens her infatuation and adoration by truth or any kind of criticism.
Just for a laugh ... some creative memes mocking the duchess of mudslide manor.
She is a huge fan of TBW.
My opinion: too many people judge a person by how much money and media attention they can get. Neither of these two 'achievements' are a result of good character, talent, or doing anything meaningful and worthwhile. As a reminder, Spare and Fifty Shades of Grey sold millions very quickly!
I doubt that they paid the author 3 million for the rights to her book, but with all the attention she is getting, she will sell more books and end up being wealthier (after sharing her income with publisher and publicist). Good for her! And then when she realizes that she sold all her rights to that book to them (merching included) ...!
But I am looking forward to a meeting between them all, with lots of gushing and hugging and love bombing and word salad ... the falling out will be epic! Or will TBW want complete ownership without the actual author of the book 'trying to take attention away from her'?
This has made my day! Brilliant - Veruca Salt & Willie Wonka - original at `meghan markle parody' - but I can't find it.
Brilliant. Just my opinion, but between you and @WBBM you have pinpointed how TBW uses his 'abandonment' issues about his mother to manipulate and control him. Irratiinal, but the child thinks 'if I am very good Mummy won't leave me'.
Now almost six years later the same world is watching a woman who is totally incapable to learn ANYTHING about her mistakes. She is repeating them again and again, which would be hilarious if it wouldn't be so utterly boring.
With what talent does she think she is going to produce a film? Producing films require hard, hard work. Also a proper amount of creativity. And probably high skills with human interaction when dealing with groups of people who work together.
Well, Albert Einstein said something about doing same thing over and over again and expecting different results. And he didn't call it "whip-smart".
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/15kkjfv/%F0%9D%91%AC%F0%9D%92%8D%F0%9D%92%8D%F0%9D%92%86_%F0%9D%91%AD%F0%9D%92%93%F0%9D%92%82%F0%9D%92%8F%F0%9D%92%84%F0%9D%92%86_is_%F0%9D%91%B5%F0%9D%91%B6%F0%9D%91%BB_a_fan_of_meghan_markle_%F0%9D%92%94%F0%9D%92%98%F0%9D%92%8A%F0%9D%92%91%F0%9D%92%86/
https://www.elle.fr/People/La-vie-des-people/News/hors-serie-elle-royal-plongez-dans-les-coulisses-de-la-couronne-4140556
I read several comments on Reddit regarding the $3 million purchase of the movie rights. Commenters suggest that WME is in control of Archewell Productions and will take control of the movie production for a hefty fee but * will still be given executive producer credit. Their contract with Netflix is the only mega deal they still have, runs out in 2025, so WME is ensuring something is produced on time. Netflix still has the option to refuse to purchase the movie. Pearl was a no, Miss Haversham is probably a no, and Invictus Games is no where near finished. My question is who is financing these projects? I don’t think * or Harry have the cash or want to spend their own money.
On dit `Psycho' !
`Elle France is not a fan of Meghan Markle'
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/
I do hope the Royals manage to squeeze a little fun out of such observations.
https://twitter.com/sage1411/status/1688534009247137792
So what else did Harry’s wife do to Princess Charlotte? Must be bad as Charlotte still looks afraid of her to this day.
There's more to it but it's an image so I can't post it here. Basically, there seems to be something else that * did to Charlotte that is being hidden.
Some people are saying that * twisted little Charlotte's ear during the drama about the bridesmaids' dresses.
I find that hard to believe because if that were the case, there is no way a parent could be civil or even stay calm in the presence of someone who hurt their child.
Thanks for the link to Elle France. 'Les enfants terribles' is often used rather affectionately although I 'm not sure in this context. All I could read was:
What will happen to Harry and Meghan?
He was the country's favourite and she could have become the princess of hearts but they chose exile.
Funnily enough, there was a film The Parisian Bitch, Princess of Hearts - in French, Connasse, princesse des cœurs: 'The film follows Camilla (Camille Cottin), a capricious Parisian woman who thinks she deserves a princess life and decides to go to the United Kingdom to try to marry Prince Harry.' (Wikipedia). I've never heard of this film, has anyone? I wonder if Elle was trolling her?
The Duchess of Sussex will team up with husband Prince Harry to produce Carley Fortune’s “Meet Me at the Lake” for Netflix, as part of their multi-million dollar deal with the streamer, Page Six can confirm.
The deal was signed in the past few weeks — and despite initial reports, the Sussexes didn’t buy the rights to the book, believed to be worth around $3 million.
Instead, Netflix purchased it for them to produce under their Archewell Productions arm, we’re told.
The book is “right up their alley,” said an insider.
...
https://archive.ph/2023.08.07-202734/https://pagesix.com/2023/08/07/netflix-spent-millions-on-harry-meghans-hollywood-domination/?utm_campaign=pagesix&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social
I fail to understand this at all. She has no experience as any kind of producer, and has messed up every project. She could not even produce a podcast without more than a dozen staff from Spotify, plus building her a studio, plus ...
Please could someone explain this insanity to me! And surely Netflix did not spend 3 million!
Just had an idea ... what if Netflix knows they will stuff it up, which gives Netflix the perfect opportunity to tell the duo to get lost, but they still have the rights so can bring in a dream team to actually produce the project? Am I being delusional?
Re the YouTube video about *'s rings being taken, I had a look at her rings. It's rather difficult to find close ups of the rings but it seems to me the central diamond in the redesigned ring is slightly smaller, not as high. The shank looks slightly thinner too. Did she substitute the stones for inferior ones/lab created ones? Adding diamonds on the band would be the perfect excuse for the ring disappearing for a while, although I must admit it's a famous ring so I'm not sure how she could have pulled it off.
https://images.hellomagazine.com/horizon/original_aspect_ratio/502c0330fb80-meghan-markle-engagement-ring-before-after-z.jpg
@ Sandie: Page Six saying in addition to not wanting to act again, and not want to direct or be the producer, it seems Meghan doesn’t want to take on a role that actually requires work, which means that she, or she and Harry, or she and the unfortunate target who will bankroll this project and any other future projects will take on the job with no real work involved except taking as much credit as possible if it is a success. That title would be slapping her name on it as Executive Producer, the same title she and Harry slapped on the ready-made leadership project they bought and claimed for themselves.
Executive Producer is basically a vacuous title for someone who has contributed not much or nothing to a project to use to insert themselves at the top of a project or production they contributed little or no work to complete.
My guess is she wants to let everyone else do the heavy lifting and then swan in when it’s finished to take a far larger share of the end product for herself.
Typical narcissistic behavior very much in line with her past behavior.
Harry and Meghan’s new Hollywood move shows how self-centered they are
The world’s biggest navel-gazers have finally hooked a buzzy new project.
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have acquired the film rights to the New York Times bestselling novel “Meet Me at the Lake,” by Carley Fortune, which cost a cool $3 million.
They’ll be developing it for Netflix who, back in 2020, inked the couple to a multi-year $100 million deal.
Is this pivot from focusing on themselves into fiction some sort of redemption?
We all knew the juice had been squeezed out of the lemon after “Spare,” the gag-inducing “Harry & Meghan” docu-series and a failed $20 million “Spotify” deal — in which they failed to produce anything beyond Meghan’s podcast ode to her personal grievances, with bonus celebrity guests.
Could this new move be proof that Harry and Meghan, who are in a rebrand effort under the hand of WME honcho Ari Emmanuel, are finally turning the corner after their high-priced, high-ego failures to launch?
Hardly. It simply underscores their narcissism.
Choosing this romantic novel, which mirrors a fair amount of their own biographies, is yet another sign of the couple’s self-centered and boring devotion to the themes that keep them atop the throne of victimhood.
According to Deadline, the book’s plot points include “childhood trauma, including losing a parent in a car crash” — shades of tragic Princess Diana — as well as “mental health challenges and post-natal depression.”
The story, which is about two 30somethings falling in love, also has a broken friendship (hello, Jessica Mulroney, who Markle reportedly dumped “to look woke“) and takes place in and around Toronto, where Markle’s old TV show “Suits” was filmed.
Sounds eerily familiar. The only thing missing is a fight with a sister-in-law over flower girl dresses and a sit down with a talk-show host named Moprah Minfrey.
This choice shows the Sussexes’ keen inability to even consider a world beyond their own “lived experiences.”
The boring but handsomely paid pair are now simply laundering their own carefully crafted tales through someone else’s work of fiction.
Great storytellers can channel others’ points of views with empathy, summon imagination and create worlds most of us couldn’t imagine.
At this point, they seem like aspiring reality stars — wannabe Snookies and Sandovals — just itching for more of their agenda to be projected on the boob tube. But they’re now doing it through veiled methods to give them respectability.
Trauma influencer Prince Harry couldn’t get his preposterous podcast idea — diving into the childhoods of Trump and Putin — on the air for Spotify. Meghan’s animated series “Pearl” about a “young girl who learns to step into her power” was nixed by Netflix.
Even the couple’s latest image makeover — much needed after their professional bombs and shamefully exaggerated tale in May, when they claimed to have been in a “near-catastrophic” paparazzi chase — has featured their greatest hits: entitlement and a lack of personal accountability.
In a People magazine cover story last week, a source defended the pair, saying the Spotify deal sputtered out because they were “given no formal lay of the land to kick things off, so they were already on unsteady footing even before the ink was dry.”
Besides it being oddly similar to Meghan’s assertion that the royals didn’t prepare her for royal life, it uses the word “given.” Therein lies their great assumption: They’d be handed everything along with a bag of cash.
If most people were paid that kind of scratch despite having no experience, they would make it a mission to figure out the lay of the land on their own.
The lone project that shows any promise is “The Heart of Invictus,” which will reportedly be out later this month on Netflix. I expect it to about the wounded warriors — their grit, determination and athletic triumph after life-altering injuries. It’s likely not about Harry.
At least I pray it’s not.
If this were pro sports, Harry and Meghan would have been cut from the team a long time again and mercilessly mocked as busts.
But to be kind to the busts, they had to do something remarkable to make it to the big leagues in the first place.
I always understood that directors are the creative ones who work directly with cast and crew, whereas producers are the backers with the dosh.
Ha! I forgot - in her own mind, she's capable of doing both simultaneously, plus screen writing as well. She's up there with Spielberg. Funny... I don't see her name on this list:
https://www.imdb.com/list/ls000075300/
As You Lake It
The usual finarkles
from hither and thither
Madam’s poisoned darts
on set, all a quiver
This celluloid mirage
Crafty* trompe l’oeil
A mere bagatelle from
Best Boy** and Tramp Cloy…
*Craft(y) production team providing snacks
**Best Boy-Assistant to…
Thanks @Rebecca
for the NY post
She’d have to be post-natal
to be depressed ???
@OCGirl
They really are a pair of fools
They’ll leave nothing behind but
matching stools…😉
Ah, Maneki
madam’s essence of ordure…
Essence de merde?
This is how the movie version of the book keeps the names of the main people but the actual plot is only vaguely similar even when you consider how much they have to cut out to make the book fit movie length. And then there is the whole creative view of how the director/writers see the book which is why the book describes the hero as blah,blah, blah but the director sees them as brunette,hazel eyes and, get this?, green skin.
So, I think the idea of throwing them this as a bone (after NF purchased it), allowing them to play house with it and then using it to get out of the contract is a good strategic thought.
There is a book about the making of the movie Harold and Maude which, although years ago, has some stuff about how studios can pull strings/control to alter who can do what as I recall. It's been a long time since I read it.
If the author was using someone who is connected with her new working "friend" in HW, there could be some left hand, right hand work together but that is speculation.