Skip to main content

And the Next Act is...?

What's next on the docket?

Thinking about the Kevin Costner event.  What do you think each person was told about how they should do during this  "event"? 

That's an interesting rabbit hole.  Who said what to whom and when?  What is intriguing is to wonder: who would have thought to pre-think how to handle it if she did X, do this or if he did that, then this.  Or did anyone feel the need to come up with flowchart responses for anyone else?

And, what kind of fallout options are there now that that is out there on video tape which are being whispered about and will dog them?  footnote 1

I don't know but do most events have to think up how to handle what could be a "difficult" situation that guest X or guest Y might decide to go free range?  Having always been on the responsibility level for tickets of low level special events, how common is it to have to have guidelines for handling free ranging participants or is it only people they think "could be" a problem?  Or is this a big city/VIP thing?  Talk show backstage must be a job fraught with a lot of tension.


Politics?  Maybe?  Maybe not though.  The comments on the DM are quite the range from her supporters who cannot wait for this/do not appear to be promising to be able to vote though ... to people dying to see how that plays out on South Park.  Or those who wonder if this will finally be what cracks open what has been carefully hidden about her? That would be a cautionary tale of Be careful what you wish for.

One of the problems with politics is that you are actually on a thinner line than as an actress.  If you don't get a part in movie X, there are a lot of other people you are up against.  Other really good people and there isn't a whole lot of public news of how you ranked 657th in a field of 1000 for the role. Politics is very different.  You have a much smaller field of competition (couple versus almost everyone in Hollywood).  And, you (and everyone else on the planet) gets to read your numbers against the others.  You got X votes but someone else got XXXXX votes.  You lost.  Very public loss.  And if you are having any depression, this has the potential to be either a real high (before a lot of work begins) or a very, very embarrassing very public loss). 

I don't really think they would let her start with something as high profile Dianne's seat as her entrance for a couple of reasons.

One is that there have been people circling that seat who are known to the power around Diane already.  They (the source of power) have know this was coming and plans were set up some time ago.  The power people will have a strong sense of who would fit or not fit into that vacuum.  Not as likely to have a complete unknown as the first choice.  Too many unknowns at a time when needing enough people to control Congress can be down to single digits means cannot have a loose cannon.

* has kind of a varied work history - almost debutante-like in the flittering from acting to the British Royal Family to leaving it to, during covid, some good works to life in a big house in Montecito, Spotify, Netflix and then so distraught at events in his autobiography.  Not a lot of sustaining which could translate to work to sell an image in politics next life adventure.  Not to say that she could not step in on the national level but most of the time, people have political experience elsewhere which shows their sustainability to this kind of work as it is not just photo ops of planting a tree somewhere.  It is a lot of time learning about different bills, talking with the others and what is the best decision for the people I represent.

Alex Padilla, the other senator, actually replaced Kamala when she moved up.  He had a chunk of political experience before he became senator.  He was appointed to fill that open slot and then won it in a special election.  Terms are for 6 years and Dianne's was up in 2024 (again, they knew that was coming and needed to be planning on it as the 2024 primary voting date is March 5th - less than 6 months away - wouldn't we have been hearing more discussion of her being a front runner this close if she were a realistic contender?).  

He also is from the LA area which we all know is not that far from Montecito where as Dianne lived in San Francisco.  This may or may not feel important but when you have only two people representing the whole (a big) state, some people may feel that having both seats filled by people who are geographically close to each other may translate to not being sensitive to the needs of people who live in a far corner of the state - very far away from the LA area.

She could be appointed by Newsom (maybe) but would he think that would help or hurt him short and long term?  I do not know.  

Or this could all be moot and was something thought about then but ... that was last year.  Not now.


What do you see as the future for her?  what options?  And for him?  

footnote 1
Um, I am reminded of this song.  Something amusing about the idea of replaying all the parts you like and fast forward those don't.  In reality, the internet really didn't exist at that time so the idea that you could have something good/bad live on so publicly long after you have passed and that you have no control over this  was not an option  for Steve ...  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQ-0DEte3K4  

But what plays out now is that people will continue to see what was done in the past and that the internet doesn't ever forget.  That can get embarrassing.  And harder and harder to hide it (and opponents will have little fear about using it against you).

Comments

abbyh said…
Nutty and us Mods strive as much as possible to make this a welcome and friendly blog. Please do keep in mind that everyone posts with the risk of potential dissent, criticism, and unpopularity. We depend on Nutties to keep this place respectful and hopefully fun.


This blog may or may not be the blog you are looking for. If not, we wish you well and hope you find what you are looking for.


Guidelines for this blog is as follows:

-Keep discussions on the Sussexes. Politics must be strictly related to their involvement. Off topic subjects are permissible but should be limited and are subject to the discretion of Mods.
-Be civil and courteous in discussions.
-Posters who are disruptive will not have their posts posted.
-Anonymous or unknown posts are not allowed.
-We know that some of this is not family friendly. It can be a fine line sometimes on the topic of sex and sexuality. Try to lean towards family friendly (thanks).
-Profanity has not traditionally been a problem, so let's keep it that way.
-Please try to keep the conspiracy theories down.
-Do not discuss the blog, blog history, or other posters.
-No personal attacks both direct and indirect.
-Please de-escalate "fights" by dropping the subject.
-Please remember that the focus of the blog is on others, not any individuals posting here. So if your name is not attached to something posted, please begin with the idea that what is written is not likely to be directed at you if it upsets you.
-Posts which may be deemed too many flat statements/too provocative or exceptionally mean spirited may not posted on the blog.
-Remember that not every one who reads the posts is happy about what is posted here.
-Remember that certain sites require prior approval for reuse such as Harry Markle. Please respect their request. Links to share is a great alternative.

-And, thank you posts are always nice.


Mods do their best to ensure the guidelines are met. However, lapses happen because moderating this blog is a 24/7 responsibility and we all have jobs and families (and laundry) to care for. If you see overlooked issues, please feel free to message us so we can address them.

Thank you again for all your patience and support.

Moderation on.
Sandie said…
@WBBM
That VF article you posted is quite disturbing.

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2019/11/meghan-markle-for-president-documentary

The 'documentary' is from November 2019, before she was exposed, over and over again. And it was on True Royalty TV, which makes a lot of questionable 'documentaries' of various members of the royal family.

https://play.trueroyalty.tv/browse

I think she tried very hard to establish a political platform for herself when they left the UK, but it has not panned out. It will be interesting to see if she does succeed in grabbing Feinstein's seat. She will only hold it for about 6 months before an election has to be held I think. How badly could she mess up and how many people could she piss off in that time?
Fifi LaRue said…
Some time ago I read something about Costner; he's highly intelligent, shrewd, talented in a wide ranging way. When the Harkles were thrust upon him as non-paying "guests," he knew he had a problem on his hands, and he was pro-active in controlling the events. Ari Emmanuel knew exactly what he was sending to Costner's event, and would not have blindsided Costner with a couple of loose cannons.

Newsome said he had not ruled out * as a fill-in for Feinstein's seat. Appointing * would be political suicide I'd think, plus a direct affront and insult to the BRF. Newsome must have greater political horizons for himself, and needs to think ahead strategically.
OCGal said…
@Magatha Mistie, I am of two minds here:

I absolutely love Flibbertigibbet - your new take off on the beloved Flipper Theme Song, but I am now being drive wild because I sang your version out loud (very impressively, I might add), and it is now stuck tight as a leech replaying in my brain and will not leave, for love nor money.

Just like the doucheass, who will not leave her royal beta cuck husband, nor he, her.

Is she the leech and he the host? Or is it the other away around? I think both. Their marriage is a mutual assured destruction pact.

Unfortunately they won’t eventually bring only one another down, but have already brought down so many others, and either do not care one whit, or rejoice in their targets’ destruction.

I can only hope and pray that their destructive actions don’t eventually take down the marriage (or worse) of the Duke and Duchess of Wales, but if that happens, I hope The Flibbertigibbet and cowardly lazy loser spouse find themselves on the gibbet (metaphorically speaking, of course, I say for legal reasons).

———————

For those Nutties who didn’t get to sing this wonderful and naughty piece by Magatha already since it was on the previous post, I offer it here: Brava and thanks to our poetess:

“ Apologies:Vars and Dunham
Flipper Theme Song

Flibbertigibbet

They call her flicker, flicker
face that is frightening
Hopes no-one can see
her exposing her ‘v’
As we know flicker
loves just to plunder
It’s really no wonder
she sickens
you and me…”

SwampWoman said…
Gavin Newsome has presidential aspirations. Every state looks at California, and says "I want that level of fail for the entire country!"
OCGal said…
Commenter on SaintMeghanMarkle subreddit, when exasperated about the doucheass’ constant parade of astoundingly inappropriate clothing choices:

She is mutton dressed as lamb
OCGal said…
I agree with this comment from SaintMeghanMarkle subreddit, when asked why Harry stays with his abusive handler aka wife:


“Harry stays with her so he can screw her and Pa at the same time.”



SwampWoman said…
I've got the Flipper earworm stuck in my head now! Great work, as usual, Magatha!
Sandie said…
https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-fascinating-family-history-of-the-american-set-to-revolutionize-the-royals

An interesting article, in which she makes up stuff and gets found out ... as early as at the time their engagement was announced. People were still giving her the benefit of doubt then.
Props to @Magatha for the brilliant reimagining of Flipper. It will forever be twinned with an endless loop of her trying to sex up her flat chest.

She would have trouble getting elected to her local city council, much less the senate. The smart money is on Democrats convincing Kamala Harris that she should transition from VP to the Senate where she could essentially hold the position for life because California voters would be willing to overlook her incompetence and general unlike-ability. This would allow Newsome to run for President without having to deal with the left-wing blowback from Dems failing to anoint Biden’s black female heir apparent.
Makes sense.
Curiouser and curiouser - questions being raised about royal jewellery:

https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/16xatm6/mm_has_been_accused_by_one_of_the_late_queens/

Meghan the Magpie?

And yet Suzy Menkes published this in 2019, featuring the Reflections suite:

https://www.vogue.co.uk/article/where-have-all-the-jewels-gone

So, there's been less bling on display anyway (considered inappropriate these days?) or has some of it really been pinched?
Whops, wrong date-it was 2018, just after the wedding.
Wow, Wow and Wow again!

Somebody on SMM set about answering the question `Just who is Misan Harriman?'. We shouldn't really be surprised about the answer:


https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/16wzddt/boris_becker_bankruptcy_bad_investments_nigerian/
Also, go back to this:

https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/z94umv/oh_you_sinners_i_bow_to_your_ability_to_smell_bs/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm

The first comment is very disturbing, in the light of the Ngozi event:

Valuable_Error_2015

10 mo. ago
This is not a simple PR move — THIS IS A FILTHY POLITICAL OPERATION — THEY WILL STOP AT NOTHING TO TAKE THIS FAMILY DOWN. You are not dealing with a normal situation. There are land mines buried months in advance just waiting for the right moment to detonate.


`This Family' = British Royal Family.

It looks like conspiracy. It smells like conspiracy...

What do you think? It could explain a lot.
Opus said…
So how does it work seeing that California needs a new Senatoress? Would the fact that she is a Duchess and married to No. 5 be an impediment or a bonus. California (of which I hear nothing but bad things) needs and deserves Markle who is female, black - well her mother is - under-rated movie star and whip-smart humanitarian with a bachelors in International Relations. Am I missing anything?
Yesterday was, apparently, the International Day of Older Persons, instituted by the UN in 1991 - but this is the first I've heard of it. Radio & TV? Crickets. The silence says everything.

It was marked, however, by this splendid post on SMM:

https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/16xf57s/happy_international_day_of_older_persons_1/

Beautiful photos of older persons, past and present, in the RF, Thank you, SMM
Sandie said…
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/16xngjt/happily_megsy_wont_get_to_play_will_she_be_a/

Newsome did choose a black woman, but it is not her. The woman he chose is political and from an organization that seems to exist to get more Democrat women into office:

https://emilyslist.org/
Maneki Neko said…
@Wild Boar

Great find about Harriman. He is connected to Ngozi. Hence *'s new found Nigerian heritage.

Interesting comments on the Reddit link you gave us, particularly from 'Maleficent-Trifle940' (This just in: GRITS on Tumbler) and 'somespeculation' (Here's a few tidbits), a bit long but well worth a read.

We have Harry, Archie Harrison and now Harriman. * must have been fated to meet Harry!
Maneki Neko said…
Apparently, * "did not make the cut": "Newsom picks Laphonza Butler as Feinstein replacement", not Megain according to politico.co
Teasmade said…
Not trying to be off-topic here, but since this HAS been a topic:

"California Gov. Gavin Newsom will appoint EMILY’s List President Laphonza Butler to fill the seat of the late Sen. Dianne Feinstein."

Hope this shuts down the speculation (although I was looking forward to having all the dirt released were * to put herself out there.)

And I *think* -- Hikari can set us straight -- the degree is in communications, not in international relations. The international relations is just a, wink wink nudge nudge, sideline, IYKWIM.
Sandie said…
PART I (what a load of BS ...):

Entertainment commentator Mark Boardman said that the 39-year-old Duke of Sussex “longs” for his friends and would love a home in London."

“He appears to have distanced himself from his college friends and lacks a permanent UK residence. During his visits to London, he typically resides in hotels and avoids public appearances. Undoubtedly, Prince Harry longs for his old friendships.”

There was talk that the King could be considering leasing one of the royal residences to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, a claim since denied by Buckingham Palace.

Ultimately, he would 100% love a London base and he’d love it to be on royal grounds, even if it was in Windsor or one of the apartments in Buckingham Palace. But it’s not going to happen.

“But ultimately, Meghan wants Harry to be by her side to support her, to look after the kids and to get his life back on track. And anything going backwards is going to take away from that.”
Sandie said…
The BS continues and escalates:

"Perhaps one thing that will be helping Harry get his twinkle back is the fact that he is thought to have reconnected with some members of his family, with Mark saying that he’s now back in touch with the Duke & Duchess of Edinbrough.

He said, “Meghan and Harry have reconnected with Sophie and Edward, and this renewed connection may serve as their gateway back into the royal household. Despite a significant age gap, both couples have endured substantial public scrutiny over the years."

https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/16xpjk7/meghans_frustration_prince_harry_wants_his_old/

Hapless did not go to college. Eton College is a school.

When has there ever been any connection between the Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh and the dastardly duo, other than a family connection? What do the duo think they can get from this family and why do they think they can exploit them?

All members of the royal family, especially those who are working royals and children of the reigning monarch, get a lot of public scrutiny.
As Sandie says, Eton may be called a college but its not one in the sense in the US restricted sense.

The word has a whole range of meanings here. Roughly, it's applied to communities for educational, professional or religious purposes, originally as: constituent parts of university; a professional body, esp. health related (eg Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons) or, as in Rome, an electoral college. It harks back to pre-Reformation religious foundations.
Edward had a very shaky start to public life, from his undergraduate days/leaving the Marines/ Royal Knockout and his other less than successful theatrical ventures. Yet he has made good, married to dear Sophie.

Maybe he can see how H ended up as he has? He did make polite conversation with H at that Commonwealth service IIRC so perhaps he imagines he can `mentor' H back into to life as a decent family member?

Good luck with that, I'd say.
Mel said…
So...if H avoids public appearances whilst in London, his family won't talk to him, neither will his friends.....why is he there?
OKay said…
@WBBM Edward does not appear to be filled with rage, and he has the capacity and apparent willingness to learn and adapt. Sadly, none of that applies to our Harry.
Fifi LaRue said…
Hairy told his friends to "eff off" long ago by not inviting his friends to the wedding and/or reception. He also told his family the same thing with his book. The PR output for digs in London is what we get on the surface; the Harkles must be putting pressure on KCIII for, what else, money and lots of it. They're always on the make/hustle for money.
NY Post:

Ban private jets that aren’t carrying my celeb pals, drown GOPers in acid and ban royal visas: How Meghan Markle’s political playbook might look

By Piers Morgan

https://nypost.com/2023/10/02/how-meghan-markles-political-manifesto-might-look/

Girl with a Hat said…
Lainey Lui, *'s ass kisser, has removed the "Royals" tab on her website.

I guess Lainey thinks that there won't be as much gossip coming from the Royals now.
Fifi LaRue said…
@Mel: Might Hairy be taking funds from his accounts? People like the Harkles who draw funds quarterly from a trust always run out of money way way before the quarter is over.
King Charles offers an olive branch to the Sussexes
Queen Camilla offers an olive branch to the Sussexes
William and Catherine offer an olive branch to the Sussexes
Edward and Sophie offer an olive branch to the Sussexes
Anne, princess royal offers an olive branch to the Sussexes
(probably Timothy Laurence offers an olive branch to the Sussexes)
Beatrix and Edo offer an olive branch to the Sussexes
Eugenie and Jack offer an olive branch to the Sussexes

All these people offer the olive branches to the Sussexes just to keep this beautiful and talented pair in the newspaper news every week: because, as we know, they are worth it!
Maneki Neko said…
Spotify boss suggests Harry and Meghan's £18m podcast deal 'didn't work' because it failed to 'make consumers happy' after Sussexes made just 12 podcasts in two-and-a-half years

...Ek [Spotify chief Daniel Ek] was speaking to the BBC's Zoe Kleinman who had questioned him on whether 12 podcasts across two-and-a-half years from the Sussexes was worth £18million. She said his response had been 'very diplomatic'.
(I bet it was! Had to be)
. . .
Simmons, Head of Podcast Innovation and Monetization at Spotify, condemned the pair in an episode of his own podcast.

'The f***ing grifters. That's the podcast we should have launched with them,' he said.

'I've got to get drunk one night and tell the story of the Zoom I had with Harry to try and help him with a podcast idea. It's one of my best stories.'
That would be interesting to hear/read 😁

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12585437/Spotify-Harry-Meghan-Archetypes-podcast.html
Mel said…
I wonder if that olive tree has died yet...poor thing, struggling along with no branches.
Sandie said…
https://www.gbnews.com/royal/prince-harry-meghan-markle-news-royal-family-analysis

The above article sums up how September was planned to be a triumphant month for them, carefully crafted and executed (IG documentary, charity appearance in the UK, IG appearances, Costner appearance), but then unravelled (low viewing figures for documentary, denial of a room at Windsor Castle, mic grab at Costner event, scandal of gag order for kids at Harlem school at what was branded as a charity event but was actually promotion of her pathetic book).

They always do this to themselves ... I am struggling to word this in a polite way: dress it up to mask the true character, but the stench of what it really is never goes away.

On another topic: how can it take so long for that agency to get deals for her? Something is wrong.
Sandie said…
https://youtube.com/@MeghansMole?si=4xJo7tHa28gkyb_u

I hope the link works. But go to the community page for the Meghan's Mole channel. The post is about the moon bump and it is quite an eye opener!
SwampWoman said…
Mel said...
I wonder if that olive tree has died yet...poor thing, struggling along with no branches.


ROFL! They must have an entire orchard of olive trees without any branches at this point!
Sandie said…
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/16yqnvy/meghan_appears_in_a_photo_and_a_short_video_on/

And then there is this ... herself appearing in a photo, not looking pregnant, about a month before the birth of second child.

So, the video was made at least 5 months before the birth or the poster got dates completely wrong. Or, a surrogate was used.

SwampWoman said…
Sandie said: On another topic: how can it take so long for that agency to get deals for her? Something is wrong.

I'm pretty sure the Costner appearance was one of the deals...but, in order to get a paid deal and not a quid pro quo, the merchant is going to have to be able to see a return for using her. Does her wearing designer clothing or jewelry or shoes make them sell better as opposed to using a model that would wear the correct size? I'd say it would be the reverse. If I'm going to look like a wrinkled mess* in designer clothes, I'll just grab something at Kohls or Nordstrom Rack. Preferably wash and wear.

*Disclaimer: I really love linen. And rayon. And cotton.
VetusSacculi said…
Sandie asked On another topic: how can it take so long for that agency to get deals for her? Something is wrong.

I think the clue is in the question - WME is a talent agency and she has been found to have none, and publicly labelled as untalented by Jeremy Zimmer of United Talent Agency, a competitor of WME. From a quick look at their site, WME bought the Harry Walker Agency where * is listed on their roster of speakers. Curiously, I'm sure Harold was also previously registered there but he seems to be no longer.
Sandie,

IIRC, H let the cat out of the bag by telling us that they were `both' present for Lilibet's birth. Under conventional circumstances, it's taken as a given that the mother's here and only the father's whereabouts are commented on.

In this case, he's indicated that *'s presence was optional.

Meghan's Mole has some new footage here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNcik0RDb_g

She's such a lousy actress she can't even act how a heavily pregnant woman walks, leaning back to counter the extra weight in front.


OCGal said…
@Wild Boar Battle-maid, WOW!

Somehow I had never before focused on your great quote and eye-opening point:

“IIRC, H let the cat out of the bag by telling us that they were `both' present for Lilibet's birth. Under conventional circumstances, it's taken as a given that the mother's here and only the father's whereabouts are commented on.

In this case, he's indicated that *'s presence was optional.”

Thank you for bringing this to us.
Sandie said…
@Swampwoman

Linen and cotton ... me too! I refuse to iron and for years have lived under the delusion that somehow when I wear a wrinkled garment, my 'body heat' will 'iron out' the wrinkles! But, I am not a royal duchess on display!

@WBBM

That duo are so 'messy' in remembering details and were so free in 'sharing' that they have tied themselves in knots. Surely the royal family smell something fishy? They seem to be 'resolving the problem' by keeping the duo at arm's length, in America/overseas, and just ignoring the glaring discrepancies on the royal website, where the duo are still listed as dividing their time between the UK and North America and upholding the values of the monarch, or some such nonsense. It is bizarre. Just remove them from the website, or simply include them in a list of heirs to the throne who are not working royals.
Sandie said…
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/16yqnvy/meghan_appears_in_a_photo_and_a_short_video_on/

See the updated comments on the thread ... the poster made an error with dates.
Sandie said…
https://www.geo.tv/latest/511278-prince-harry-is-buying-out-toxic-media-if-you-cant-beat-em-join-em

This is a bizarre story. Here is an excerpt:

-----
Mr Foldi said, “After claiming that ‘toxic’ media drove him to leave the royal family, Prince Harry – along with a crew of billionaires – is on his way to take over your local newspaper.”

For those unversed, these claims have come as a result of the news that Prince Harry, alongside 21 other donors, pledged 500 million dollars to “strengthen communities and democracy” by supporting failing newsrooms ...
Sandie said…
Re. Royal jewellery:

-----
I will tell you all I know about Jewellery.

No. She didn’t steal anything. Let’s not incriminate the poor woman. I debunk that immediately.

Harry was left items, (no tally) which he gifted to Meg. The fact he gave them to M didn’t sit well with *Some* members of R Family.
-----
I know the above posts don’t imply she stole. Throughout the thread others have speculated that as the reason for tensions.

I happen to know the situation which caused the most contention was H gifting some Di possession to her, (but, why not? She’s his wife!)

https://twitter.com/BarkJack_/status/1705821448818786752

But, an earlier post from this account says that she is refusing to return items of Diana's jewellery that were lent to her to wear. This is my understanding of how jewellery works:

Gifts of jewellery are either personally owned or are part of the royal collection. Often jewellery in the Royal collection is in practice on lifetime loan to one particular woman. So, other than Lilli, no other royal woman is likely to wear the wedding diamond bandeau while TBW is still alive unless she 'gives permission', although it is actually the monarch who has the right to decide who can wear what.

Unless there was an agreement between the two brothers to keep Diana's personal jewellery in a 'pool' for daughters-in-law and granddaughters, and so on, to wear (much like jewellery in the royal collection), they would have divided it up and what each took would be theirs to do what they want with it. What William took will probably end up in the royal collection once he becomes monarch, but what hapless took will probably end up being put on auction.

I do wonder how much of Diana's jewellery TBW got her hands on and what has happened to it.
Hikari said…
Sandie asked On another topic: how can it take so long for that agency to get deals for her? Something is wrong.

Vetus replied

I think the clue is in the question - WME is a talent agency and she has been found to have none, and publicly labelled as untalented by Jeremy Zimmer of United Talent Agency, a competitor of WME

When we heard that ILBW had signed with WME, I was like, Da fuq?? Her reputation was not demonstrably better a few months ago. Surely someone of Ari Emmanuel's stature in the industry knows what he's dealing with. The jungle telegraph in Hollyweird would have been abuzz with the gargantuan Netflix flop, the Spotify debacle and her desperate and pathetic attention grabs. The infamous schlockumentary had already aired in which she mocked the Queen, and stories of her screaming fits have to be legion around that town.

It's not just that * lacks talent or any definable Q factor whatsoever; she is impossible to productively work with in any capacity. She will not be managed, even by people she's paying to ostensibly look out for her interests. Being untalented and only average-looking for Hollywood didn't prevent her from having a well-paid recurring acting role on a moderately successful show for 7? years. Of course, behind the scenes she was a nightmare. I suppose an agency like WME could find her some modest work if only she'd be amenable to direction and acknowledging that she is NOT EGOT material. The Hallmark movie channel is her level. A lot of actors live quite well churning out that cheerful tripe. If * could project a 'nice' persona and any aura of giving AF about her grooming, WME could have probably gotten her booked on the morning Mommy shows and arranged some photo shoots for magazine pieces. Would've supported a book tour or the relaunch of the Tig. The problem they have is that there is NO 'There' there to promote. Harry and the wife give zero back to their investors. This woman has no ability to do any of the things she's always trumpeting herself for. So how exactly is her very expensive talent agency supposed to promote her? Even if she were still in good standing with the Royal family, she ran away from the UK where that actually mattered. Americans do not give AF about a grifted title of British royalty which she lied and schemed to obtain and never deserved in the first place. She and her husband have themselves rendered the relevance of the Royal title moot by abandoning their duties that came along with those titles and abusing two nonagenarians on the world stage. Any perceived potential they had in 2020 vis making the 'exiled Royals' strategy viable in La-La Land has been proven spurious.

The real question here is . . . Why did Ari Emmanuel get in bed (figuratively speaking) with her at all? He didn't snap her up three years ago when any residual interest in her would have been at an all-time high. We are witnessing now the Narcissistic Collapse and she's worthless now as a client, just as she's always been as a human being. I can't believe she's even paying Ari's bill. I bet she isn't and will be dumped shortly.
Perhaps * paid WN+ME a retainer for, say, a year. After that, they'd g a percentage I imagine;
They can see she's not worth spending much time or energy on, just enough to save them being sued for doing nothing.
Whatever is done this side of the Atlantic to cut her down to size risks all hell breaking loose for whoever does it, I should think, whether Crown or Government.
Hikari said…
@Sandie

If Harry gifted his wife jewellery that was the personal possession of his mother and then given to him after her death, gifts are the recipient's to do with what she pleases. Even flog them for cash, which has probably already been done but under the terms of an ironclad NDA so we will never know what became of them.

This is, while painful to think about, not illegal. Tasteless and grasping but not anything criminal. The Queen Mary bandeau, if in fact Harry's wife was permitted to wear the real thing and not a paste copy, has been returned to the Royal vault where it belongs. In ordinary circumstances, that piece likely would have been *'s lifetime loan from the Crown, for her use during Royal events requiring a tiara. Since she is no longer a member of the Royal family, I think it's safe to say that she has no further claim whatsoever for the use of that tiara.

I think there is VERY compelling reason why HMTQ decreed that after the wedding, Harry's wife would have no access to any of the Royal jewels OR that she was to be permitted any access to Royal palaces and properties without an escort at all times. Her reputation proceeded her for taking unauthorized photographs, snooping where she should not and . .one wonders whether any small and unattended curios disappeared from endtables when the Duchess was around.
Hikari said…
WB,

It feels like the hell that the Suxxits have already unleashed is enough to be getting on with. The two grifters have already spilled their guts and made up a bunch of lies about the RF to Oprah, in Spare, various magazine pieces and the schlockumentary in Netflix. * continues to meddle in William’s marriage by churning up the Rose rumors again whenever things get quiet. H trashed Charles’s Queen and both hounded HMTQ and Philip to their deaths, at least that can be one reading of the situation. They have taken a huge dump all over the monarchy and the British people.

One wonders—what further he’ll can there be? The NWO wants to take the monarchy down, but * has proven time and again that she won’t stick to a script and listen to handlers. The only “cause” she cares about is MeGain, LLC. If she had the smarts and the long-range thinking to be a top-grade political operative, she’d be dangerous, But with their volatile and hedonistic toddler mentality’s, M & H are a couple of loose cannons that Are too unstable to be usable. Women of color like Kamala Harris and AOC are much more useful weapons as they are already in place in the halls of power. *’s Chief preoccupations are merging cheep Tat and angling for an invite to the Met gala. She’s so vapid she makes the notoriously lightweight VP Harris look like a rocket scientist. AOC tended bar for years before auditioning for a role as a United States congresswoman. But they are playing the game in ways that Harry’s wife is constitutionally incapable of due to her mental disorders.

The next election cycle will be interesting. I think the strategy of the Democratic Party is to get Biden reelected and then promptly forced him to step down citing mental incapacity, to be replaced by VP Harris. By this back door method, they will install a black woman as President of the United States who is manifestly unelectable on her own merits. What will ILBW’s future be under a Harris administration? Probably not much different than now. Certainly I don’t foresee a cabinet appointment on the basis of her slapping on the bronzer and claiming Nigerian ancestry. Plus there’s the pesky matter of that title of nobility. No political entity here stateside is going to touch that with the barge pole. ILBW’s level is “convention hospitality.” If delegates like their entertainment unkempt, slathered in body make up and long in the tooth. She’s not a real player in the world events, she is the dumpster fire sideshow.
Hikari said…
WB,

It feels like the hell that the Suxxits have already unleashed is enough to be getting on with. The two grifters have already spilled their guts and made up a bunch of lies about the RF to Oprah, in Spare, various magazine pieces and the schlockumentary in Netflix. * continues to meddle in William’s marriage by churning up the Rose rumors again whenever things get quiet. H trashed Charles’s Queen and both hounded HMTQ and Philip to their deaths, at least that can be one reading of the situation. They have taken a huge dump all over the monarchy and the British people.

One wonders—what further he’ll can there be? The NWO wants to take the monarchy down, but * has proven time and again that she won’t stick to a script and listen to handlers. The only “cause” she cares about is MeGain, LLC. If she had the smarts and the long-range thinking to be a top-grade political operative, she’d be dangerous, But with their volatile and hedonistic toddler mentality’s, M & H are a couple of loose cannons that Are too unstable to be usable. Women of color like Kamala Harris and AOC are much more useful weapons as they are already in place in the halls of power. *’s Chief preoccupations are merging cheep Tat and angling for an invite to the Met gala. She’s so vapid she makes the notoriously lightweight VP Harris look like a rocket scientist. AOC tended bar for years before auditioning for a role as a United States congresswoman. But they are playing the game in ways that Harry’s wife is constitutionally incapable of due to her mental disorders.

The next election cycle will be interesting. I think the strategy of the Democratic Party is to get Biden reelected and then promptly forced him to step down citing mental incapacity, to be replaced by VP Harris. By this back door method, they will install a black woman as President of the United States who is manifestly unelectable on her own merits. What will ILBW’s future be under a Harris administration? Probably not much different than now. Certainly I don’t foresee a cabinet appointment on the basis of her slapping on the bronzer and claiming Nigerian ancestry. Plus there’s the pesky matter of that title of nobility. No political entity here stateside is going to touch that with the barge pole. ILBW’s level is “convention hospitality.” If delegates like their entertainment unkempt, slathered in body make up and long in the tooth. She’s not a real player in the world events, she is the dumpster fire sideshow.
Maneki Neko said…
Sixteen weeks after his Coronation, King Charles has radically reset his late mother's concept of the 'Family Firm', now categorising them, according to a source, as Senior Royals, Working Royals, Non-Working Royals and Others.

The Others are, apparently, Andrew, Harry and Meghan – with Andrew getting preferential treatment over the Sussexes.


(Just a two paragraph DM article among other brief news items)
So what does that make the Harkles? Not even 'Non-Working Royals' but 'Others'. This is a demotion and humiliating, I would have thought. They can try all they like to maintain a friendship or a semblance of a friendship with Eugenie or Beatrice or whoever but in reality they are complete nonentities. It would be better to remove H from the LoS and counsellor of state or perhaps this is Charles' tactful way of doing things.
Sandie said…
Sixteen weeks after his Coronation, King Charles has radically reset his late mother's concept of the 'Family Firm', now categorising them, according to a source, as Senior Royals, Working Royals, Non-Working Royals and Others.

The Others are, apparently, Andrew, Harry and Meghan – with Andrew getting preferential treatment over the Sussexes.

He was allowed to join Edward at the one year memorial service for the late Queen at St George's Chapel in Windsor while Harry, on the same day, struggled to get permission to pay his respects at her tomb there.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-12590443/EPHRAIM-HARDCASTLE-King-Charles-resets-Family-Firm.html
@Hikari,

I heartily concur! I'd drafted something to the effect that I'm thankful she's so incompetent at achieving even her immediate objectives, let alone long-term aims. The UK would be in real trouble if she didn't fail at so much.

I must have forgotten to press `Publish'. You've expressed it better than I, plus given us the American dimension. Thank you.
I found this on today’s SMM – a valuable read, written from a US perspective :
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/09/13/prince-harry-local-news-censorship-archewell-foundation/

Prince Harry hates the press. So why is he buying it up?
It's hard to believe a man who called the media ‘toxic’ cares about local democracy
MATTHEW FOLDI
13 September 2023 • 3:45pm

After claiming that “toxic” media drove him to leave the royal family, Prince Harry – along with a crew of billionaires – is on his way to take over your local newspaper.
A coalition under the name Press Forward has received funding from the Prince’s Archewell Foundation, alongside 21 other donors, with the aim of subsidising failing local newsrooms across America. They’ve already pledged 500 million dollars, and hope to eventually raise a billion dollars in the next five years.

Their stated goal is to “strengthen communities and democracy”. But Harry’s open disdain for journalists, and his pals like Pierre Omidyar who have a previous track record of supporting censorious non-profits, call this philosophy and non-partisan branding into question.
Harry’s move to swoop in and save journalism seems like a “if you can’t beat ‘em, buy ‘em” approach. He’s hardly shown any interest in American democracy before: “I’ve got so much I want to say about the First Amendment as I sort of understand it, but it is bonkers... I don’t want to start going down the First Amendment route because that’s a huge subject and one which I don’t understand because I’ve only been here a short time.”

But going down Harry’s oft-maligned “First Amendment route” is exactly what his and Meghan Markle’s Archewell Foundation plans to do, along with the scions of some of America’s richest families. Markle herself isn’t Harry’s only accomplice in his efforts to transform the information that Americans consume masquerading as news.

Billionaires like Pierre Omidyar, the eBay founder, along with the heirs to the Ford family fortune have also pledged money to Press Forward. It’s not the first charitable drive Omidyar has involved himself in: through his nonprofit Luminate, he has donated over $1 million to the Orwellian-sounding Global Disinformation Index (GDI).

The GDI is far from non-partisan, and appears to dedicate itself more to shutting down conservative news sites than actually combating disinformation. GDI’s blacklist – which includes the New York Post and the Daily Wire amongst its “disinformation” peddlers – has been used to force advertisers to cut off conservative outlets, throttling their finances and limiting what Americans can read. The State-Department-funded “National Endowment for Democracy” group cut ties with GDI after an investigation into their blacklist, citing a desire to avoid involvement in domestic politics.


Continued...
...Part 2:

What do the donors of Press Forward think about the Supreme Court, one of the last lines of defense for journalists? Not much good: the same conservative justices who are likeliest to side with Americans against the Biden administration’s push to censor what information they see on social media, as seen with the recent Missouri v. Biden ruling, are the same ones that are subject to increasingly-desperate attacks from outlets backed by Harry’s new friends.

The Ford Foundation has ploughed money into ProPublica and Alliance for Justice, which recently hosted a press conference demanding that conservative Justice Thomas immediately resign from the court. Its investments are creating a cycle of endless outrage – and then building off of that to turn the outrage to expressly political ends.

On the electoral side, the path is clear to see how agenda-driven local news outlets are designed to change elections, potentially altering the future of America, and consequently, the world. Two well-funded groups have already been testing the waters with varying degrees of success. Last year, Democrats spent tens of millions of dollars across the country backing a series of innocuous-sounding local outlets like The Dogwood, conveniently located in key swing states.

Similar sites are run by Tara McGowan, who has boasted as far back as 2019 in private memos that The Dogwood “will not only function to support the flipping of both State House and State Senate chambers in Virginia this November, but will also serve as a vehicle to test, learn from, and scale best practices to new sites as we grow.” In this way, local news will be replaced with localised Democratic Party propaganda.

Good-quality local news is vital in ensuring the ongoing stability of American democracy. But we cannot afford to be naïve about the intentions of organisations like Press Forward. The dissolution of local papers is a tragedy. Americans deliberately choosing to seek their news through conservative outlets is not – regardless of what Prince Harry and his rich friends think.
________________________________________
Matthew Foldi is a political reporter for The Spectator US. He was previously a staff writer for the Washington Free Beacon and a candidate for Congress in Maryland’s 6th district


Food for thought, O,Nutties.
Disappearing silver - I found an allegation, in the depths of SMM, of her even nicking silver teaspoons.

The phrase, `Better count the spoons!', has almost passed into folklore here, as a remark made when those of doubtful probity are on the point of leaving the house. Putting the family crest onto silverware was not originally a status symbol but a way of deterring light-fingered servants from thieving. It made swag traceable.

Hikari said…
Harry talks out of both sides of his ginger gob. Depress he hates so much has made him famous and apart from the infamous Nazi costume incident and a certain pool party in Vegas, the price mostly looked intelligently at his bad boy antics and was single-handedly responsible for him being the cheeky beloved favored royale that he was before he met up with The BW. If they press left him manifestly alone and refused to take his picture or write a single word of him, he sure wouldn’t like being ignored. He doesn’t hate the press so much as he hates that they have the freedom to publish what they like about him, even when it’s the truth. Heat and the wife both want Universally fawning press coverage And absolute control over what is written about them. That’s why he’s buying at the newspapers… With what money one wonders? The dude is lost in a fantasy world just like his wife.
Sandie said…
@WBBM
Thanks for posting that Telegraph article.

Perhaps I am mistaken, but I think their attempt to brainwash people by controlling local media is misguided. National and international news outlets and online platforms have far greater reach.

I am astonished at what I see going on in the West ... blatant censorship, propaganda, abusing the law to defeat political rivals, trial and punishment by the mob, and so on. People are homeless, lacking good nutrition and decent health care and this is how rich people spend their money!The surveillance uncovered more than a decade ago seems rather old fashioned in the modern environment!

I think the 'wheel' will turn, at first slowly and then will gather speed, and they would have made themselves the poster royals for fascism, which is how history will remember them. It is difficult to bury your history with the Internet, and they keep on being tripped up by that anyway. We have receipts!
Elskainga said…
Nutties- Wanted to share this post from Twitter. (X) about the Harkles Spotify deal

Theresa Longo Fans replied

Salty Duchess
@duchess_salty
Spotify reveals real reason why Harry & wife £18m podcast deal failed. Meghan, 41, revealed she signed the podcast deal in December 2020, a month before she and Prince Harry departed from being working royals. Deal struck when WORKING royals 🤬

If the deal was signed in December 2020, you know negotiations occurred much earlier. Same thing with Quibbi negotiations although that streaming company never came to fruition. The CEO Ik also said that they were more interested in having Harry do podcasting. Ouch for *. but not as harsh as Bill Simmons “F@.cking grifters”.

I do hope ‘1st Amendment is Bonkers’ Harry does waste his $$$ on buying up small going-out-of-business newspapers. More and more people get their news from the internet or streaming. Yes, parts of the internet can be censored but not all of it. Good luck with censoring criticisms of you and your horrid wife.
abbyh said…
The problem with trying to buy this or that newspaper is that it is like bubble in the bubble wrap. There always others just next to the one you just popped which isn't under your control.
Maneki Neko said…
Slightly OT but not irrelevant

Kemi Badenoch is an MP and the Secretary of State for Business and Trade. She was born in the UK but her parents were originally from Nigeria and she has lived in Nigeria (so has genuine Nigerian ancestry 😉). She made a speech at the Tory party conference and declared that Britain was "the best country in the world to be black in". Of course, some people disagreed but Nana Akua is a TV presenter born to Ghanaian patents and said "I've travelled and lived all over, and I know it [Britain] to be far better than most places when it comes to racism." (I am white but I agree with both of them). I just wish * could read what they said (some hope!) because her accusations of racism - about both the BRF and the country as a whole - were unjust, undeserved and frankly insulting.
Happy Camper said…
Fifi La Rue said: When the Harkles were thrust upon him as non-paying "guests," he knew he had a problem on his hands, and he was pro-active in controlling the events. Ari Emmanuel knew exactly what he was sending to Costner's event, and would not have blindsided Costner with a couple of loose cannons.

Newsome said he had not ruled out * as a fill-in for Feinstein's seat. Appointing * would be political suicide I'd think, plus a direct affront and insult to the BRF. Newsome must have greater political horizons for himself, and needs to think ahead strategically.

@Fifi:

I’ve read that WME represents Costner and he was asked to allow them to be there as a favor to Ari. Costner did WME a solid, so so Ari owes Costner a big favor in the future.

As for Governor Newsom’s choice to fill the now vacant Senate seat,

California Gov. Gavin Newsom has selected Laphonza Butler, a Democratic strategist and adviser to Kamala Harris' 2020 presidential campaign, to fill the U.S. Senate seat made vacant by the death of Sen. Dianne Feinstein. Butler is the president of Emily’s List,

Here’s the big reason Governor Newsom picked Ms. Butler: Money.

Newsom has his eye on running for President in 2028. Emily’s List is a well-organized political action committee that was founded to mainly support Democrat female candidates for political office at all levels who are pro-choice on abortion.

This group has a lot of money to throw around, and by naming Ms. Butler to serve out the remainder of Feinstein’s Senate term, which ends in January 2025, Newsom is cozying up to this influential and well-financed political action group to support his own climb up the political ladder.

Here’s a bit about Emily’s List and their money from the current Wikipedia entry:

From 1985 through 2008, EMILY's List raised $240 million for political candidates.[1] EMILY's List spent $27.4 million in 2010, $34 million in 2012, and $44.9 million in 2014.[3] The organization was on track to raise $60 million for the 2016 election cycle, much of it earmarked for Hillary Clinton, whose presidential bid EMILY's List had endorsed.

I expect if Harry’s wife isn’t already an Emily’s list member, she will be if she truly has any political aspirations.
Sandie said…
Off topic but royal adjacent ... rich royals with class:

-----
none other than the Prince and Princess of Wales indulged in what might be described as fervent window shopping last Friday when they paid a discreet and entirely private evening visit to the salerooms of auctioneers Dreweatts, in Berkshire.

'They were looking very, very interested,' a devotee of the antiques trade tells me, adding that 'everybody was all of a twitter to see them. It was the beginning of the very big champagne reception that auctioneers always have before a serious sale.'

And few sales are such landmark occasions as the one that lured in Prince William and Catherine.
Beginning on Wednesday, it's the three-day auction of the extraordinary collection amassed by Robert Kime, who oversaw the redecoration first of Highgrove and then of Clarence House for King Charles.

Numbering nearly 1,000 lots, ranging from Mughal carpets to Delft vases, it's expected to bring in at least £1.5million – a tribute to Kime's inspired but understated style, both as an interior decorator, as he described himself, and as a gimlet-eyed antiques dealer, whose genius won him the adoration of clients like Daphne Guinness, Lord and Lady Lloyd-Webber and Lord Puttnam.

Dreweatts, and Kensington Palace decline to comment on William and Kate's visit. Others suspect that a discreet telephone bid – or two – may be made on their behalf.

'Not so much to buy for themselves but as presents for Kate's parents or brother or sister,' suggests another admirer of Kime, who died suddenly last year aged 76.

'Perhaps not the Ushak medallion carpet for £50,000, or even the George II longcase clock for £4,000 but the 15 Bronze Age axes for £2,000. What else would you give a mother-in-law?'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-12594759/EDEN-CONFIDENTIAL-William-Kates-secret-evening-visit-sale-antiques-Berkshire.html
Sandie said…
@abbyh

Very wise comment! If you want to be a major influence, you need to buy a huge international platform and a very powerful one ... and that requires a lot of money, staff and expertise. I remember when I was much younger ... it was CNN that had that kind of global influence, but now the Internet has opened the door for free speech and a variety of perspectives, minute by minute.

Sorry to go off topic ... there is yet another story today about eco zealots stopping a theatre production in a 'just stop oil' protest. I understand the desire for activism (I was an 'activist' myself), but homelessness, poverty, war, rampant shallow consumerism among the elite, increasingly facist control by governments, war on freedom of speech, the continued use of landmines and cluster bombs, rampant pollution ... and they choose 'just stop oil' when they have no solution for meeting energy needs without fossil fuels (which would hurt developing countries far more anyway) and the ignored fact is that global warming happens, with or without humans (and global cooling) and humans survive and thrive by adapting.

As for the duo, if they really do care about the issues they use as a global platform for attention (especially her), how about doing something that counts ... establish, from start, a place of safety to protect women and children from violence, a food kitchen for the homeless, a shelter for the homeless, and then do the same, city by city, across America.
@Hikari

O/T

I might subscribe to `Stop Burning Oil', if such a movement existed, on the grounds that oil is `too important to burn'. (I gather that most, if not all, of the synthetics that were once made from coal are now made from oil) but the 2-word version of the slogan is another example of shallow, uncritical thinking so common today. Like the one `Imagine a World Without Plastic'.

The adherents are probably all Sugars.
Man who intended killing ERII with crossbow being sentenced today for treason - several live channels:

eg

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-66108009
Hybrid sentence, Broadmoor hospital & gaol: 5yrs custody in all, then 5 yrs on licence; transferred to gaol once psychiatric issues resolved.
Sandie said…
PR put out for them by People magazine (it is a very long article):

-----
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are making their return to New York City to mark World Mental Health Day, PEOPLE can exclusively reveal.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be in N.Y.C. on Tuesday, Oct. 10 for their Archewell Foundation's first-ever in-person event, which will provide a platform for parents navigating mental health challenges in the digital age.
The Archewell Foundation will host 'The Archewell Foundation Parents’ Summit: Mental Wellness in a Digital Age' to give voice to families who are passionate about building a safer online world for children and teens, PEOPLE exclusively reveals. The conversation will explore how we as a community, both globally and locally, are creating positive change and supporting one another in developing solutions to empower families and uplift our collective mental well-being.

The summit will feature parents who have experienced tragic loss connected to their child’s social media use. Meghan and Harry have been working with the parents involved in next week's event behind the scenes, PEOPLE has learned.

"The families have been engaged with The Archewell Foundation for the past year, bolstering community and driving towards solutions," a spokesperson for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex tells PEOPLE. "Together, they are united in their mission to share personal experiences, data, and research to ensure the same does not happen to other families."
Sandie said…
Cont.

Prince Harry, 39, and Meghan, 42, will participate in the summit alongside Surgeon General Vivek Murthy to discuss the importance of this work and explore potential solutions, in a conversation moderated by Carson Daly, Board Member of Project Healthy Minds.

The event will take place on Tuesday, October 10 as part of Project Healthy Minds’ second annual World Mental Health Day Festival, the first and largest of its kind in the country. Project Healthy Minds is a Millennial and Gen Z-driven non-profit focused on tackling the growing mental health crisis, and a longtime partner of Meghan and Harry's Archewell Foundation.

Uplifting communities, building a better online world and restoring trust in information are the key pillars of the Archewell Foundation, which Prince Harry and Meghan launched in 2020. The Archewell Foundation operates with the core belief that mental health and collective wellbeing is paramount and approaches all philanthropic work through this lens.

The Archewell Foundation Parents’ Summit will Meghan and Harry's first trip to New York City following the Ms. Foundation Women of Vision Awards in May, where the Duchess of Sussex was honored. The following day, a spokesperson for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex said the couple and Meghan’s mother Doria Ragland were involved in a "near catastrophic car chase at the hands of a ring of highly aggressive paparazzi.”

Harry and Meghan have long made mental health a key tenant of their public work, and have supported World Mental Health Day in recent years. In 2020, the couple joined the Teenager Therapy podcast and spoke to five senior students at an Anaheim, California, high school about prioritizing mental health. The appearance came after the couple relocated to Meghan’s home state. following their step back from their royal roles in the U.K.
Sandie said…
Cont.

On Oct. 11 last year — the day after World Mental Health Day — the Duchess of Sussex opened up on her podcast Archetypes about how Harry found her a referral to a mental health professional when she was at her "worst point."

"I mean, I think at my worst point, being finally connected to someone that, you know, my husband had found a referral for me to call. And I called this woman," Meghan said in conversation with activist and Bollywood star Deepika Padukone for an episode titled "The Decoding of Crazy."
"She didn't know I was even calling her. And she was checking out at the grocery store. I could hear the little beep, beep, and I was like, ‘Hi,’ and I'm introducing myself and that you can literally you're going, wait, sorry. I'm just. Who is this? Um, and saying I need help. And she could hear the dire state that I was in," Meghan recalled. "But I think it's for all of us to be really honest about what it is that you need and to not be afraid to make peace with that, to ask for it."

The Duchess of Sussex previously touched past struggles with her mental health when she and Prince Harry sat down with Oprah Winfrey for a CBS interview that aired in March 2021. Two months later, Prince Harry and Oprah’s mental health docuseries The Me You Can't See debuted on Apple TV+. The two teamed up to “lift the veil on the current state of mental health and well-being," a statement said.
Sandie said…
Cont.

In the series, King Charles’ son spoke about experiencing panic attacks, starting therapy and processing the death of his mother, Princess Diana. Harry also revealed that Meghan inspired him to seriously pursue therapy.

"It was meeting and being with Meghan, I knew that if I didn't do therapy and fix myself, that I was going to lose this woman who I could see spending the rest of my life with," he explained.
Mental health was a key theme throughout the Duke of Sussex’s memoir Spare, released in January.

Speaking with PEOPLE exclusively ahead of the book's release, Prince said says his one hope with releasing the text is to "turn my pain into purpose," adding, "If sharing my experience makes a positive difference in someone's life, well, I can't think of anything more rewarding than that!"

As part of their advocacy against stigmas surrounding mental health help, Prince Harry and Meghan marked Mental Health Awareness Month in May by spending time with a youth group near their home in California. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex heard about the pressures young people face from teens aged 14 to 18 from AHA! Santa Barbara about how mental well-being is affected by societal pressures and social media in the digital age.

Making the announcement on their Archewell Foundation site, Prince Harry and Meghan said they'd learned "firsthand about this generation's experiences with social media and societal pressures, and how it affects their mental well-being. The couple engaged with these amazing youth in candid conversation, working to find solutions together."

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex made multiple mental health-related engagements before stepping back from their royal roles, from a beachfront chat with OneWave, an Australian surf group dedicated to raising awareness for mental health, and visit to Waves for Change, an organization that supports local mentors providing mental health services to vulnerable young people living in under-resourced communities in South Africa.
Sandie said…
https://archive.ph/2023.10.05-171228/https://people.com/meghan-markle-prince-harry-announce-nyc-visit-world-mental-health-day-exclusive-8347857

The link for the article.
Sandie said…
1:30 pm The Archewell Foundation Parents’ Summit: Mental Wellness in a Digital Age Join NBC's Carson Daly and parents for a discussion on building community and creating positive change for a safer online world for young people, with special guests Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, and U.S. Surgeon General, Dr. Vivek Murthy.

https://www.projecthealthyminds.com/events/2023-festival

They have weaseled their way into an event that is already taking place in New York, but the People article makes it sound as if it is their initiative.
Maneki Neko said…
@Wild Boar

I thought the offence of treason had been abolished but Blair only amended the treason laws so no government officials can face criminal charges for treasonous acts.
Re Jaswant Singh Chail, 'he was given a hybrid order, which means Chail will remain at Broadmoor high-security hospital until he is well enough to serve his sentence in prison.' 'He was given nine years in prison, with a further five on licence.'

This was a murder attempt on a sovereign, he probably would have got less for an ordinary citizen. I presume the 9 years will be halved unless his psychosis worsens and he is detained indefinitely in Broadmoor.
Rebecca said…
So ironic that they will be participating in the Mental Wellness summit in NYC after proving that THEY clearly need help in that department, as proven by the imagined life-threatening car chase.
Sandie

Mental Health do - enough to make a cat laugh.
---------

2 precedents for mental cases going for monarchs:

George III recognised that his attacker was mad and begged guards not to hurt her. She was detained for life, IIRC

Victoria- only one of her assailants executed:
https://www.historyextra.com/period/victorian/queen-victoria-assassination-attempts/

The Law takes lunacy into account in such cases. If the Harkles were ever to be tried for reason, they'd be sent to a `Special Hospital ' for the criminally insane.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%27Naghten_rules

Also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Surgeon_of_Crowthorne by Simon Winchester

An extraordinary tale of how the first OED was compiled largely by a Broadmoor `resident'.
Maneki - yes, the judge said he took that into account. If someone's mad, they are regarded as not being responsible for their actions.
Martha said…
@sandie…thanks for taking the time to post that article…the drivel. Do you think People is taking a swipe at them? The podcast, for eg. I’d neither read nor heard that part, just odds and sods. She said absolutely nothing! They must have been mocking ?
SwampWoman said…
Happy Camper said:
California Gov. Gavin Newsom has selected Laphonza Butler, a Democratic strategist and adviser to Kamala Harris' 2020 presidential campaign, to fill the U.S. Senate seat made vacant by the death of Sen. Dianne Feinstein. Butler is the president of Emily’s List,


Yes, but what about that pesky California residency requirement? She resides, has a driver's license, and is registered to vote in Maryland. I know, rules for thee, not for me.
Over on SMM, she's being likened to Ceaușescu for her arrogance.
Sandie said…
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/170y3mz/lets_look_at_the_context_of_a_sugar_analysing/

A very long post that is well worth reading ... alarm bells were going off at a very early stage but few listened. It is only in places such as this forum that people saw through the BS so early.

I love the 'breakfast' story. Remember the shooting weekend when she went ballistic about the blankets being the wrong shade of red? Hapless hosted that weekend. At breakfast, instead of the host eating breakfast with his guests, he filled bowls with granola and took them upstairs for him and TBW to eat in their bedroom suite. Odd behaviour indeed, and very rude. Couldn't they have got staff to serve breakfast in their suite and pass on excuses to his guests?
Sandie said…
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/1712aem/rachel_meghan_markle_and_prince_harry_to_host_a/

Although this event is being advertised as: 'The Archwell Foundation Parents' Summit', the text describes them as participating, not hosting or leading. The media will comply and the entire event will be reduced to their appearance (nothing else will be achieved by this summit).

This is an exercise in trying to 'change the narrative'. I reckon that WME is struggling to get her deals because her reputation is in the toilet so they are trying to change the narrative and rehabilitate her. (Wipe out the 'car chase' NY debacle and replace it with this grandiose narrative.) Hapless and her are very much in control as they are only saying yes to events that 'fit in' with their story. For them this appearance is major, and is all about them and their aims (control, domination, attention, wealth, adoration ...).

IMO, online 'safety' is not achieved by draconian censorship and propaganda but by teaching emotional resilience and critical (objective) thinking, plus encouraging activities other than being online, and teaching interpersonal skills. Most of all, take responsibility for your own feelings and thoughts, beliefs and actions ...
SwampWoman said…
I'm here for the LOLs. I'll be going about my activities of daily living while periodically checking for pictorial examples of what NOT to wear for her body type. (It's a public service, really.)

Everybody get your Bingo cards ready! Will she pack an iron? Will she show an inappropriate amount of skin for a professional event? Will there be some sort of altercation that demonstrates their need for state-funded security? (I'd tell them if they can't go out in public without being assaulted to keep their asses at home and stay the eff out of my city, but that's just me.) Will Harry be allowed to speak? Will Harry evade The Claw (tm)? Will there be a wrestling match for the microphone?
Sandie said…
@Martha
People worships her and posts her propaganda, so I do not think they are mocking her.

https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/171bu9z/no_more_clearing_out_restaurants_for_privacy_this/

She was eating out again. No sign of hapless. Why does she have sunglasses at night?
----
Anyone have a link to this Page Six article?

“Meghan has a new team around her,” the insider added, “and they’ve been strategizing about what mediums will have the most impact.”

The source told the outlet that Markle’s next step has “to be rooted in giving back” and “philanthropy” and that she has been in contact with fashion houses and documentary directors.

“There isn’t anything locked in yet, but the most promising [thing] for everyone seems to be Meghan and Harry highlighting important issues through docuseries and bringing attention and fundraising,” the insider explained.

https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/171b0h9/page_six_on_speed_dial_again_today_megs_new_team/
OKay said…
@Martha People just prints what they're paid to. I'm sure no mocking was intended; the writer probably hasn't even got a clue what they have or have not done with their miserable lives.
OKay said…
@SwampWoman Laphonza Butler moved to California in 2009 and was very involved in politics there. She only moved to Maryland in 2021 and is now moving back to Cali. It's fine. Nobody's breaking any rules.
Mel said…
Mm will bring her own mic.

Unfortunately, H's mic will have accidentally been left at home.
Mel said…
Mm has had 3+ years to demonstrate her 'giving back.'
Zilch. Nada. Nothing.

That's a lost cause.

If she's so interested in giving back, why doesn't she return the 3 million dollars that she absconded with from the elephant charity?

And pay back Charles for all the dollars she scammed him out of with her clothing?
SwampWoman said…
OKay said...
@SwampWoman Laphonza Butler moved to California in 2009 and was very involved in politics there. She only moved to Maryland in 2021 and is now moving back to Cali. It's fine. Nobody's breaking any rules.


And I have lived in Georgia, still own a house in Georgia, but I'm registered to vote in Florida, own a house in Florida, my vehicle is titled in Florida, and I am residing in Florida. Does that mean that I can be appointed a senator in Georgia?
Magatha Mistie said…

Quickie 🎤
Apologies: Joni Mitchell
Big Yellow Taxi

Autocrazy

Don’t it always seem to go wrong
Garage shot is all that she got
She paid valet price
photo in parking lot…
Ooh, shop-op-drop-flop

Maneki Neko said…
How many more 'projects' are we going to hear about? Nothing concrete ever materialises, nothing has ever come to fruition. It's all talk and no results. This is now getting extremely tedious. No matter what agency represents her, she needs talent and hard work, which seem to be in short supply. WME will part company with her, she'll find another agency, they'll come up with other projects. Rinse and repeat.
Magatha Mistie said…

@OCGal
Thank you
We can only hope
The end of
her ‘n’ dope…

@Swampie
She’s wormed her cast
a pile of…

@Golden Retriever
Flatlining…

I do wonder....

I was seeking an old article in the Daily Mail about Catherine, Princess of Wales and they didn't recognize any person of that name, only someone called Kate Middleton.

It seems that the newspaper's personnel are totally incapable to forgive the Prince of Wales that he married an intelligent, beautiful, very stylish, elegant woman (MA Hons), who has given birth to three beautiful children and works very successfully for the British Nation as a member of the British Royal Family.

There must be several female journalists who consider that they would have been more capable royal consorts and are very indignant that they are not. Hilarious.

(The Guardian and The Telegraph have no difficulty to recognize the royal lady by her correct title. Which is even more hilarious.)
Girl with a Hat said…
@Okay,

I agree with Swamp Woman. Rules need to be adhered to or there is a general breakdown in society. And, if the authorities don't follow the laws and regulations, regular citizens feel they don't need to as well
OKay said…
@SwampWoman Apparently, yes.
Girl with a Hat said…
@alianor d'aquitaine

I wonder how much of that attitude towards Catherine is part of the "tallest blade of grass" syndrome. In some countries, people who excel in any aspect of life are disliked and people seek to bring them down instead of celebrating them.

The press just plays to these feelings.
NeutralObserver said…
The eminently enjoyable & sane blog anonymoushouseplantfan is posting again after a brief hiatus.

https://anonymoushouseplantfan.tumblr.com/

My impression is that this blog is hosted by a PR/branding professional with a family who needs periodic breaks to attend to her busy life.

She offers a calm & informed analysis of ILBW's ongoing quest for fame & fortune. She's no fan of the Todgers, but her language is temperate & sensible. She doesn't bother with the pettier stuff & name calling, she's more about what's working or not working in terms of building a brand/public persona.
Maneki Neko said…
@Magatha

'Sham-pooh!!'

Sham-pooh indeed!😉
SwampWoman said…
Maneki Neko said...
How many more 'projects' are we going to hear about? Nothing concrete ever materializes, nothing has ever come to fruition. It's all talk and no results. This is now getting extremely tedious. No matter what agency represents her, she needs talent and hard work, which seem to be in short supply. WME will part company with her, she'll find another agency, they'll come up with other projects. Rinse and repeat.


It is so sad that dozens of people that are talented and highly paid because of their abilities to turn sows ears into silk purses are inexplicably failing her! I find myself completely unable to think of a reason for this. Surely all of those talented people frantically searching for even a smidgen of talent would have been able to dig up SOMETHING that she has at this point. Even singing to the seals might get her a paying gig at a zoo.

If they haven't been able to get anything, it's obviously due to the dark machinations of the BRF. Could it be that William is engaging in drive-by scarfings? Is the Princess of Wales sending them photographs of her death glare at ILBW but with their heads superimposed on Rachel's body? Is dear, sweet Charlotte anonymously sending pictures of bodies in coffins labeled YOU, and a stick figure labeled ME with a smiley face, a tiara, and dagger dripping blood in her hand?



Sandie said…
The Vintage Read taking a closer look at Valentine Low's book Courtiers:

https://youtu.be/qqgV9L1F95I?si=d3r5nhpJOfZ7bv3o

Hapless was a nightmare before she came along. Instead of growing up, he met someone who encouraged and enabled him, and it was downhill from there.
SwampWoman said…
Thanks, NeutralObserver! I love anonymoushouseplantfan.
Sandie said…
@NeutralObserver

Thanks for the alert that Plant is briefly back. She has posted a lot this time, and I also highly recommend scrolling through.
SwampWoman said…
Girl with a Hat said...
@Okay,

I agree with Swamp Woman. Rules need to be adhered to or there is a general breakdown in society. And, if the authorities don't follow the laws and regulations, regular citizens feel they don't need to as well


Yes, we can all see the results of the breakdown in society around us in real time.

SwampWoman said…
Sandie, thanks for the book recommendation. I agree; Prince Harry was always the person he is now. She just allowed him (or perhaps enabled him) to crawl out of the shadows into the sunlight (to his complete ruination).

Oh, well. At least she was good for something.
Sandie said…
EXCLUSIVE: Meghan Markle is rumored to be planning a massive career move, but one British Royal Family fan warned it is already doomed to fail.

Meghan Markle has been warned her reputation has been "damaged beyond repair" and "spending tens of millions of dollars on a PR makeover won't succeed" as she plots a huge comeback.

https://archive.ph/2023.10.07-172725/https://www.the-express.com/news/royals/114155/meghan-markle-reputation-popularity-comeback-royal-family

I think this 'expert' has got it wrong. A huge comeback has very little chance of succeeding because she is fake and without talent. Because of the fame and attention she achieved by marrying hapless, she could achieve some success going back on social media as an influencer and getting merching deals. But, she would have to hire people to do the work, she would mess things up by interfering in their work (unlike before, she has no job to keep her busy), she just would not get the numbers that her deluded ego demands, and I don't think she could give up her wasteful spending habits.
OKay said…
@Girl With a Hat As I stated, no rules appear to have been broken. Clearly we do not agree on that point, which is fine. It's most interesting to me that no one in government has lodged a complaint about it...you know they would if they thought they could get something out of it.
Girl with a Hat said…
@OKay,

twisting definitions by the authorities isn't helpful either when it comes to the population's belief that the powers that be don't play by the rules.

The woman is not currently residing in California. That's the rule that needs to be adhered to.
OKay said…
@GWAH Butler moved to Maryland to be in the DC area for her job. She still maintains a home in California. I won't be discussing this further, as that's not the point of this blog.
re the Wales' MA degrees, as Opus queried the meaning of the Oxbridge MA.

Scottish MA's aren't postgraduate/research degrees either; it's what they call their first degrees, True, they take 4 years but that's supposedly because the Scottish school-leaving exams, the Highers, involve more subjects, but at a lower level, than English A-levels. The English equivalent, more or less, is the 3-year Bachelor's degree.

Scotland and England are different countries, even if they don't have seats in heir own right at the UN. I wonder how many non UK Nutties know that the minimum age for marriage in Scotland is the same as in England but north of the Border, parental consent is not needed?
Sandie said…
The Duke and Duchess's business advisers are in talks with Amazon-owned audiobook and podcast service Audible, whose roster of stars includes former President and First Lady Barack and Michelle Obama.

At the same time, Meghan has been "reaching out" personally to A-List icons, including Pretty Woman actress Julia Roberts, in an effort to generate joint projects for a planned relaunch of her website The Tig, our source disclosed.

The source said: "Harry and Meghan are retooling, retrenching and preparing to change course in their efforts to establish themselves and their production company Archewell as serious players across multi-media platforms. Expect them to come out swinging in the New Year."

It now seems clear that the new platform will almost certainly be Audible and our source confirmed that Meghan’s new team at powerhouse LA talent agency WME is "closely involved" in talks.

The couple already has strong ties to the subscription service, with Harry’s incendiary memoir Spare – narrated by the Duke himself – currently being offered to listeners for free as part of a promotional deal.

This was set up by his publisher Penguin Random House and Audible bosses are said to be “delighted” with the uptake from new customers and “very interested” in pursuing a long-term deal with the couple.

The Duchess is also said to be “reaching out” to A-List stars in a search for celebrity collaborators as she reportedly plans an imminent relaunch of The Tig in a bid to become a serious online influencer.

According to a senior Hollywood production source who knows them both, Meghan’s principal target is her personal icon Julia Roberts. Meghan has said the Oscar winner’s performance in Pretty Woman inspired her own career and the source added: "Since Harry and Meghan arrived three years ago, Meghan’s been making it a mission to befriend Julia."

https://archive.ph/2023.10.09-150757/https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1821713/Meghan-Markle-Prince-Harry-Audible-deal?int_source=amp_continue_reading&int_medium=amp&int_campaign=continue_reading_button%23amp-readmore-target
Maneki Neko said…
@Wild Boar

As an aside, the minimum age for marriage in Scotland is 16 - no parental consent needed - but it's now 18 in England. The age was raised from 16 to 18 earlier this year, I think, in order to help stop forced marriages.
Hikari said…
According to a senior Hollywood production source who knows them both, Meghan’s principal target is her personal icon Julia Roberts. Meghan has said the Oscar winner’s performance in Pretty Woman inspired her own career and the source added: "Since Harry and Meghan arrived three years ago, Meghan’s been making it a mission to befriend Julia."

Do we think the 'senior Hollywood producer who knows them both is in fact, Migraine herself, albeit she's only imagining a knowledge of Julia Roberts who so far seems to have been successful in avoiding the Duchess's rapacious efforts to 'befriend' her.

As we know, Migraine's 'friendships' only flow one way -- What can her new 'friend' do for her? There is no reciprocity, unless one happens to have a charity in one's name, in which case the Duchess might condescend to donate a box of diapers or a bagful of fast food not to exceed $20 to feed 10 people on.

This blurb is unintentionally funny because hey, Migraine has been living out her fantasy of being Vivian Ward, the Pretty Woman ever since she was 16 or so. Viv, the high school dropout from Georgia who moved to Hollywood following a man and wound up turning tricks on the street when parking cars at wrestling failed to pay the rent achieves liberation from her sordid life of being a sex worker when she catches the eye and the wallet of a lonely billionaire looking to rent some companionship by the hour. So familiar!

I think Edward Lewis and Vivian did end up getting married and she was able to finish her education and buy out every store on Rodeo Drive. Unlike Hazmat, Edward benefited from his unconventional choice of life companion by actually becoming a more decent human being. They probably came up with a convenient lie to tell the kids about how Mommy and Daddy 'met'. It wouldn't be a lie to say that she helped him find his way when he was lost. If only Hawwy could say the same. The longer he stays with her, the loster he gets.
RICHARD EDEN: William and Kate quietly boost their charity with a TV bigwig while Harry and Meghan desperately try to establish themselves as a Hollywood 'power couple'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-12611999/RICHARD-EDEN-William-Kate-quietly-boost-charity-TV-bigwig-Harry-Meghan-desperately-try-establish-Hollywood-power-couple.html
My apologies, folks, and thanks, Maneki Neko - I'd missed that.

It`s less than 100 years ago that the legal age of marriage in England was raised to 16 with parental consent -

`A marriage contracted by persons either of whom was under the legal age of puberty was voidable. The legal age of (marriage)was fourteen years for males and twelve years for females.' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_in_England_and_Wales'.

I suspect that the very early legal ages were to allow a pregnant girl to marry and bear a legitimate child. That's less of an issue now

Sandie said…
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/174cun0/invictus_games_features_meghan_markle_not_with/

There is a webinar for the IG with TBW front and centre. She really has to make everything about her. The post at Reddit is long but well worth the read. (The existence of the webinar was announced by Scobie.)

And their popularity keeps sinking ...

https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/174b3hh/yougov_the_most_popular_royals_q3_2023_sussex/
Sandie said…
I think the following is very feasible(text below link):

https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/174befv/well_now_we_know_where_she_got_the_paps_on_the/

In the last episode, there are a few moments where they discussed the unrelenting paps and press when they lived in Spain, and how it was quite overwhelming and scary for their kids. They said this was one was one of reasons they moved to LA. They knew they'd get attention in LA, they'd get attention anywhere, but it would be nowhere near as bad as in Spain. The schools in LA are much more private, and they weren't really targeted when there were much bigger American market stars around.

But this little passage really stuck out to me:

DB: Every time I went to drop Brooklyn off at school, 10-15 paparazzi were there every morning. The school run, it was live on Spanish TV. Brooklyn at the time was so young, and he had to go through it, and I, uh, I don't know if it's harmed him. I don't know.

It strongly reminded me of what Meghan said in The Cut about potential UK schools runs with Archie:

Earlier in our conversation about her goals for the life she’s creating here, she’d remarked upon how, if Archie were in school in the U.K., she’d never be able to do school pickup and drop-off without it being a royal photo call with a press pen of 40 people snapping pictures. “Sorry, I have a problem with that. That doesn’t make me obsessed with privacy. That makes me a strong and good parent protecting my child,” Meghan says.

I'm wouldn't doubt the Beckhams talked to H&M about their experience with the kids & paps in Spain, and now two things have happened:

1) H&M used the Beckham's story as their own to justify their move to LA, and

2) Meghan was shading David & Victoria following their feud. Beckham very clearly had guilt and regret over the whole situation, and Meghan saying a "good" parent wouldn't allow it to happen seems (to me) like a comment meant to hurt him and Victoria.

The Beckhams must be so relieved they are no longer friendly with H& M. They're such trash for not only taking that horrific experience lived by (at the time) their friends while also exaggerating it for their own benefit, but also for questioning the Beckhams' parenting through a difficult situation they had no control over.

Remember The Cut article came out first, and now, just over a year later, we get an actual account of paparazzi harrassment at school by former friends of the Sussexes. Once again proof they haven't an original thought in either of their heads!
Sandie said…
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-12613551/meghan-markle-fisher-house-foundation.html

Video and photos of her 'secret' visit to Fisher House. Her purpose for the visit was to film herself 'royalling' and get attention. Note that the webinar was revealed way after IG, as all that glorious attention on her ended, so she had to bring the spotlight back on her.

She really is trying very hard to 'change her image'. What surprises me is that she is copying actual royals. Maybe because that is all she has going for her ... being a royal and the ability to attract media attention.
Elskainga said…
The source said: "Harry and Meghan are retooling, retrenching and preparing to change course in their efforts to establish themselves and their production company Archewell as serious players across multi-media platforms. Expect them to come out swinging in the New Year."

Markle is always retooling, rebranding, redesigning her career but spends all her energies and time on the planning stage and there is NEVER the perseverance in the follow-through and product. WME is in charge of Archewell Productions now so I wonder if they are filming the Netflix bought Meet Me at the Lake book rights.? I read that Spotify threatened a breach of contract lawsuit to get a podcast out of Markle (28 producers, editors, etc). Hollywood big players already know they are entitled and lazy.

When the pr says New Year, which New Year? 2027 ? Just saying cause they only work 1 hr/ week on Archewell charity.

Also, the age group that is interested in fashion influencer blogs doesn’t want advice from mid-fifties Julia Roberts. Is Markle harassing JR through her relationship with the Clooneys? Good way to piss off JR and George and Amal.
Maneki Neko said…
@Wild Boar

At 18, you are legally deemed to be an adult. As you may know, there have been forced marriages in certain cultures, hence a need for new legislation. 'It is now illegal and a criminal offence to exploit vulnerable children by arranging for them to marry, under any circumstances whether or not force is used.' (gov.uk)

@Sandie

Is * really that dense that she thinks she would have been pursued by paparazzi when on the school run? What about Catherine driving George and Charlotte across London to their school in Battersea? We had photos of the first day back at school and that was it. Did we have photos taken by other parents? No. Had that idiot stayed in the BRF she would have had police protection on the school run like Catherine but she is too thick (so whip smart!) to see it. And we don't have the curiosity factor as we know what W&C's children look like, unlike *'s.
Sandie said…
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/174k74d/do_we_think_the_harkles_are_only_at_the_project/

There is a gala tonight. Of course, celebrities must be given an opportunity to buy designer gear, make speeches and mingle with each other.

I really do not see how this event today is going to help anyone with mental health issues.
Opus said…
My chance to marry a sixteen year old gone forever. I was once engaged to a seventeen year old and her parents (though not mine) could not have been happier. My then fiancee, still a schoolgirl, most of her classmates were likewise engaged and indeed some already had a baby - how times so quickly change. In those days the average age of marriage for a female - the lowest it had been - was 20.8 years so you can see the pressure it placed on men - and also on females - but now it is nudging thirty. It must also be remembered that minority ended at twenty-one and thus if the minor's parents did not consent there would be no wedding - in England, but perhaps a trip to Scotland would solve the problem. In those days even the most respectable of Tory voters regarded all law in relation to sexual matters as oppressive and outdated and not to be taken seriously. As I say, how times change. Indeed when I first started to read Law one of the students was married to one (of the just four females) in the class. I would have said four too many but two were coy well-turned out and cute and sat just in front of us back-row bad boys and then there was the fourth one - less good looking but which she made up for with character and when asked by one cheeky lecturer what she understood by a 'thing in action' - it's a legal concept I have long forgotten replied that she 'always looked at the ceiling'. My Gt Gt Grandmother gave birth to her first at the age of fifteen and - reader - Gt Gt Grandpa married her and I am sure WBBM is right as to the reason for permitting early marriage for after all as Pitt the younger is said to have replied to his sovereign on appointment as P.M. as to the matter of his youth 'time may be relied upon to remedy that' - but much as I am enjoying myself I fear that I am drifting off-topic.

I vaguely recall that a criminal justice act of 1898 raised from thirteen to sixteen the age at which sexual intercourse would be permitted; the same act that most recently made illegal homosexual behaviour (men only of course). I believe part of the act has now been rescinded. Hmmm.

Am I really to believe that had Brooklyn Beckham attended school in England he would have been hounded by Paparazzi EVERY day of his term-time attendance thereat. Superstars who move to Sussex (Johnny Depp, Priscilla Presley, Madonna) are left in peace.

I remain confused as to the Ox-bridge Master of Arts degree but I suspect WBBM has one.
Sandie said…
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-12615483/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-Mental-Health-New-York.html

They turned up at the event in a convoy of seven blacked out SUVs, and got protection from the city of New York.
Sandie said…
https://youtu.be/rcAO-rJmCXc?si=1RFU6KUZl47QzTu1

This is an interview William did during his gap year, before he went to Chile, and before he met Catherine. He is so impressive, I has to share it.
-----

What the heck is she wearing? I have suspected since her appearance at IG that whatever disorder she has has gotten out of control. And how does sitting talking do any good (see quote from article below).

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-12615483/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-Mental-Health-New-York.html

"They revealed during the event that they have been working behind the scenes with the parents for the past year in order to 'create a community of shared experiences', with Harry and Meghan taking to the stage later on in the event to thank all of the mothers and fathers who shared their stories."

This comment has been removed by the author.
VetusSacculi said…
I don’t know if it’s a formal agreement or unwritten, but it’s been clear for some time that the royal children are off limits to the paps in the UK unless at a pre-agreed shoot or formal engagement. As Maneki said, * is too stupid to understand that because she always thinks she knows better.
With war in the MIddle East, I doubt anyone is paying much attention to the grifters in NYC. Which is an infinitesimal silver lining, I guess.
They drove ONE BLOCK in that 7-SUV motorcade.
Girl with a Hat said…
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-12615971/meghan-markle-prince-harry-brooklyn-school-royal.html

visiting an alternative school.

she's trying so hard to copy Catherine but she has those Sponge Bob skinny legs so she looks ridiculous in her tight jeans.
Amended post:
@Opus-
I doubt if anyone official from Oxbridge has ever pretended that the original MA degree involved further study! It's just a useful stick with which to beat those who graduated at least 3 or 4 years previously.

@Maneki Neko - yes, I had realised that. Perhaps it had just slipped my mind. I am of a generation who left school when the New Morality was being promoted but the Permissive Society had yet to come into existence.


What the heck is a `strapless blazer'? It's not even one with the top hacked off - this thing is a nipped in at the waist like a hacking jacket - blazers have straight side seams. There's an old story about a woman who thought she'd bought a topless, bottomless, dress - it was a bel
She is never ever invited in any A-list happenings so she makes a bereaved parents' discussion event a personal look-at-me show and flaunts her naked shoulders and unspeakable messy hair to the world to see who is the most important person of the humankind.

Very classy act.

This is a horrendous time we live in and that woman never misses the opportunity to look utterly ridiculous and out of touch.
It amazes me that people can't see that she's in Cloud Cuckoo Land, almost in the original sense -see Wikipedia on the ancient play `The Birds', even down to the control dimension.
Sandie said…
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-12615971/meghan-markle-prince-harry-brooklyn-school-royal.html

They also visited some kind of alternative school in NY. She was wearing stiletto pumps with that outfit. I find that odd.
Maneki Neko said…
@Sandie

Thanks for the link to the seven car convoy. They couldn't risk another 'near catastrophic' car chase! They're so environmentally conscious!

While in NY for World Mental Health day - they are to mental health what an alcoholic is to Al-Anon - * was wearing a hideous white jacket and trousers combo, the jacket being more a pale cream clashing with the trousers and revealing her bare shoulders. This reminded me of the pink outfit the ho wore at Trooping the Colour where she pulled down the neckline to show her shoulders. The links show the neckline before she pulled it down completely and after (you can see the crease of the fabric). Look at the right shoulder.

https://fashionista.com/.amp/2018/06/meghan-markle-wore-carolina-herrera-top-skirt-set

https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/style/celebrity-fashion/meghan-markle-dazzles-daring-blush-12673190.amp

An idle thought about the Oprah interview -

Was O getting her own back for the `insult' of having an allocated seat at the wedding, rather than being able to choose for herself?
VetusSacculi said…
Harold looks very awkward and uncomfortable on stage. And only * would attend an event to talk about mental health in an outfit that looks like she’s escaping from a straitjacket.
Magatha Mistie said…

Blanc-Mange 🐶

White on white
her look overall
Like a solicitous ad
for a “White Lady Funeral”
No Eames, it seems
for her bony derrière
Strait jacket became one
padded Ikea chair…

Magatha Mistie said…

Coquette

Nothing could wrest
her claw from the mike
One photo shows
both hands gripping tight
I’m no Freud
but it’s plain to see
Possessive, aggressive
prognosis, Phallusy…

Sandie said…
TVR has posted a superb video about the Harkles and online censorship.

https://youtu.be/mMGraDS8nmE?si=JBlCVriS_5eXOjeN

She hits the nail on the head in every word.

IMO, instead of growing up and taking responsibility, they always resort to whining victimhood, talking instead of working, and attacking others. They really are toddlers lording over everyone else in the playground.
Sandie said…
@Golden Retriever

It truly is astonishing, and completely mad.

TVR points out in her video that TBW dressed very similar to how she was dressed for that award ceremony in NY (when Gloria gave her an award). Completely inappropriate for the occasion. I still think we are seeing the wheels come off in real time for the couple. Unfortunately, the tabloids still make money from giving them major coverage, and all that attention keeps them trapped in their spiralling madness.
@Sandie,

An SMM sinner opined that she'd just cut the bottom off the award ceremony dress and attempted a jacket conversion. `

Didn't H say,`She makes her own clothes'?

To which we chorus `Yes! We can see that!'
VetusSacculi said…
@Sandie - thank you so much for the link to the TVR video, she is right about everything. She makes a very valid point that it is not up to tech firms to assume a parenting responsibility. The duo can sit in circle and hear about the experience of others as many times as they want, progressing through hand-wringing, emerging blinking into the light of inspiration, but there is still a big chunk of something missing. By continually adopting the victim narrative, Harold and * keep showing themselves up as two vacuous people who never have and still don't have responsibility or accountability for anything. This also keeps feeding the view of many that they do not actually have any young people permanently in their care, no matter how many stories * invents of picking up stray toys/socks and getting milkshakes.
OCGal said…
I came here this morning to make the same point I see so many other Nutties have already made: the doucheass at yesterday’s event was wearing an astoundingly inappropriate strait-jacket outfit and sitting enveloped in a strait-jacket chair. The universe gave me a thrill with that pointedly off-kilter scene.

@Magatha Mistie, I choked with needed laughter at your two terrific poems. Your revealing insights on this whole Monteshitshow farce continue to be spot on.

@Maneki Neko, thank you for the discussion and links to the (yet again overly revealing, inappropriate) off-the-shoulder pink outfit the grifting “actress” wore to Trooping the Colour. Until today I never understood how any designer could’ve done her the disservice of selling her an off-the-shoulder rag for daytime wear. It is just not done! You’ve now revealed to me that the neckline collar thing was designed to be worn up in an interesting, stylish swoop look rather than pulled down to show as much flesh as most club goers reveal at midnight. Had she worn the pink outfit as designed, I think she would have received affirmation or even praise from everyone rather than stilted words from all commentators trying to avoid calling her out on her monumental trashosity.

@Sandie, I hope you will take this as the accolade it is meant to be: I rely upon you to be the primary clipping service bringing me the do-not-miss best (or worst, depending on one’s viewpoint) news articles and opinion pieces on the two losers. I always am eager to see what you have highlighted as worthy for us.

Nutties not specifically mentioned here, although I don’t post as frequently as I would like to, I read everything posted here so thanks to the Nutty community, one and all.
OCGal said…
This video from yesterday’s event disgusted but delighted me: the doucheass didn’t even refer to Harry by his name but only as “…this one”

Listen and be amazed. She would have zero status to be on the world stage were she not married to the Royal she contemptuously refers to as “this one”. What a devaluation! And he meekly takes all she dishes out. He deserves every serving of her - and our - distain.

https://twitter.com/hrrysgreysuit/status/1711986811743121581
OCGal said…
Ooh, I pressed publish too fast. Great comment in the link I just gave:

“Remember when Harry threw a hissy fit (be)cause William called Meghan ‘that woman’

Now Harry’s been demoted to ‘this one’”
Sandie said…
@WBBM
Love your comment about the strange outfit. KIL! Someone posted on the SMM site that outfit is actually from a 2021 collection but she changed the top. Did she buy it on sale and the butcher the top (backstreet dressmaker)? Or was she inspired to 'repurpose' that dress? The outfit really looks bad when she is standing ... it adds so much width to her short frame, completely drowns her, and the top is completely wrong for those wide leg pants. Plus, she has not been this toned and thin since she was in Suits, but that top just adds girth to an already sponge Bob figure.
-----

They claim to have had positive secret talks with top tech giants about their mission to censor everything online. Who would be talking to them? Who are they harassing?
Sandie said…
Updates:

.....
Theresa Longo Fans
@BarkJack_
Would it surprise some of you to know a decent bulk of Harkles publicity is expensed to the appropriate associated business?

It’s all in the way they have set up their businesses which allows them to do things this way!

(Nope, I am not surprised. And I doubt that any astute observer is!)
OCGal said…
Oh this is just too good! The Harkles’ “royal” motorcade of seven big blacked-out-window vehicles drove them one block to yesterday’s event in Manhattan.

Had they walked from hotel entrance, to venue entrance, it is only 200 feet, yes 200 feet, but they needed to show how majestic and important they are by being brought around the block by motorcade/security convoy.

Good map in this link shows how pathetic the two losers are to continue this royal charade and think that the world is too slow to figure out their game.

https://twitter.com/TheFakeDuchess/status/1712036290043015607


Hikari said…
OCGal,

Skid Markle is enamored of all her body parts that are most problematic. She insists on highlighting her square, non-waisted torso with belted wrap dresses and coats That are either too tight or too baggy and will not be dissuaded that anything punching around her middle just highlights her blocky physique. Ditto the chicken legs and the shoulders too which are extremely broad for the rest of her frame. The pink Carolina Herrera dress she debuted in at TOC was a gorgeous color. Worn appropriately it would have been church appropriate. Worn the way * did, I was moved to christen her “Harry Rochester’s little island bride.” (Jane Eyre reference). She’d been married for five minutes and was already pushing the envelope.
NeutralObserver said…
Well, there seems to be a lot agreement on ILBW's wardrobe choice for the mental health event. It wasn't becoming or appropriate for the event, time of day or the season. She's one kooky lady.

I took a gander at SMM today to keep from reading about the horrific war in the ME. The commenters there are great & very perceptive, although one can get lost in all the posts. I did come across some comments about *'s behavior & speech at their MH cosplay event. Apparently, she cruelly & insensitively gloated about how much she loves being a 'mom' in front of parents who have tragically lost children to suicide, & she referenced people dying in cars before seatbelts were widely used in front her husband, who famously lost his beloved mother that way. Pretty vicious in my books. I couldn't believe it. I haven't watched any videos of her speech, but here is the link to the SMM post which refers to it. You have to scroll down quite a bit.

https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/1758juk/harry_is_living_his_best_lifeand_these_pictures/

@OCGal, if I could give your post at 6:30 pm a thumbs up in agreement, I would. Lots of good posts here on Nutty.
Fifi LaRue said…
The word "secret" is being used by TBW again. It's part of her M.O. "Secret" is one of her favorite words, and we've heard it over and over ever since the Harkles were fired from the RF and told to get out of town ASAP. "Secret" translates to ain't nothing happenin' with the Harkles. They are dead in the water. WME can only rustle up few and far between meager events for the Harkles to appear at.

I did note that Mrs. Hawwy looks remarkably different than the last time we saw her. It's not enough time for plastic surgery to heal. Might her varied looks be due to multiple personality disorder, and it surfaces on her face? Just a thought.
OCGal said…
For a laugh-out-loud funny (improved) version of the doucheass’ white outfit from yesterday’s event, see this marvel from The Royal Rogue on X:

https://twitter.com/the_royal_rogue/status/1712150761088405815
Until I saw the clip from Harry's Grey Suit, as posted by OCGal, I hadn't noticed how heavily her eyes were made up, so distracted was I by her garb. Who tf slathers the black on like that for for the afternoon these days? Not even Twiggy. Or are we revisiting the Sixties? Will she next appear in Gogo boots, a Courreges knock-off and a rabbit-skin fun fur?

Thank you OCGal, for triggering that hilarious image in my mind - and for the link to Royal Rogue, who seems to have been picked up on the Courreges vibe as well.


Seriously though, the way the photo has been cropped underlines just how inappropriately she presented herself.

We are also in Baby Loss Awareness Week now so it's a wonder she didn't mention her `miscarriage', something to be thankful for, I suppose. How many times now has she flaunted herself at events involving grieving parents, in order to promote herself and flog schmatter?

(BTW, that's a useful word, it's how she treats H - https://www.thejc.com/judaism/jewish-words/shmatter-1.8028 )

I agree that `Ghoul' is another apposite one one. She metaphorically feeds on dead bodies of children, while trampling over the feelings of their parents. She'd arrange a photoshoot in Israel if she could, she's that twisted.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/175yo06/archewells_statement_re_the_israelipalestinian/
Sandie said…
@Fifi LaRue
LOL!: "Secret" translates to ain't nothing happenin' with the Harkles.

Yep. If it is going to benefit them, they go fir maximum publicity, or call the paps.

'Might her varied looks be due to multiple personality disorder, and it surfaces on her face? Just a thought.'

I think you dug up a secret gem there. Although I do not think it is multiple personality order from a medical perspective but rather masks she wears that slip ... masks that convey what she thinks is appropriate in the moment. When Catherine beams as she greets people at an official engagement it is not a mask because she is genuinely delighted to be there meeting those people. The Queen wore a 'public' mask all her life that everyone was so accustomed to ... it was to hide what she was really thinking and sometimes it slipped, especially in her later years when she was known to roll her eyes on stage on I e occasion! However, when the masks of TBW slip, as they frequently do, what is revealed is a malevolent and self-obsessed creature who cannot tolerate not being the centre of attention and not dominating everything all the time.
Sandie said…
Never let a tragedy go to waste ... this grandiose and misleading statement is on their website:

"At The Archewell Foundation, with Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, we stand against all acts of terrorism and brutality. We are supporting our partners and organizations on the frontlines in Israel to provide the urgent aid needed, and to help all innocent victims of this unconscionable level of human suffering."

I wonder if this was because William and Catherine published a statement? You can read it here for comparison

https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/175m4od/cue_meghan_and_harry_issuing_a_statement_on/
Saint Meghan Markle is on fire today.

There is a link to a video by Avid Gardener talking about her friend, the courageous Yankee Wally.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_accpKSXwE

If nothing else, do watch this.
PS this is the post with the Avid Gardener link:
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/175f5n5/why_were_the_heads_of_the_sussex_squad_speakers/
Maneki Neko said…
Jumping on the bandwagon as usual, now that Charles and W&C have made a comment, the Harkles have also issued a statement. Good comment in the DM.

JohnnyLondon2051, London, United Kingdom, 53 minutes ago
That's rich considering they terrorise their own families. They certainly dont need to comment on things they dont understand or need to be involved in.

VetusSacculi said…
And, as expected, 3 2 1…. there is a word salad statement from Archewell about the Israel/Palestine conflict.
Sandie said…
Posted on X, this rumour has been doing the rounds, from before she got herself noticed by getting photographed with some fans outside the BH hotel:


So the rumor is that Meghan Markle was having lunch with David Mayor de Rothschild, the billionaire philanthropist WHOS DATING ANGELINA JOLIE, but apparently he was told the lunch was to include Harry, and as soon as he was made aware that Harry wasn’t coming, he excused himself and LEFT HER THERE ALONE! Makes you wonder how Angelina might feel about having the GRIFTER OF THE CENTURY trying to run a confidence scam on her new man? Angelina is stunning and she’s an ACTUAL HUMANITARIAN, PHILANTHROPIST AND AN INCREDIBLY TALENTED ACTOR! Nutmeg really needs to adjust her self awareness. It’s these kinds of stories that guarantee she’ll never have any A-list friends. Just saying.
Sandie said…
By the way, I am not a fan of if Angelina Jolie, but as a toxic narc, she makes TBW look like a pathetic amateur. (I do like her as an actress though.)
-----

Did he actually sit on stage and say this? Mind boggling! (Check out the post fir all the details.)

'Ryan is a chicken farmer, he's wearing ostrich boots, he lives in the middle of nowhere. He can't possibly be expected to know social media.'

https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/1768uau/twitter_calling_out_harry_for_being_condescending/
Sandie said…
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/176bkrw/covering_their_bases_on_all_crisis_it_was_only_a/

Pathetic! No doubt, photos will have been taken and will be 'released to the media' when she needs to get media attention.

(They attended a dinner and donated Archwell promotional beanies, bags and scarves to a girl scout group.)
Does H believe in Yesterday:

https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/17642cm/an_extremely_unhappy_soul_this_picture_summed_it/
Mel said…
Might her varied looks be due to multiple personality disorder, and it surfaces on her face? Just a thought.
--------

I've often wondered about that. What else could explain how she looks soooo vastly different from one time to the next?
Maneki Neko said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Maneki Neko said…
DM article
Harry and Meghan have been in New York promoting mental health. Yet their personal attacks on the Royal Family are disgraceful, writes RICHARD EDEN. What about William and Kate's mental well-being?

Harry and Meghan's 'disgraceful' treatment of William and Kate undermines their high-profile commitment to promoting mental health, says Richard Eden.
. . .
But in a trenchant newsletter for Palace Confidential, Eden suggests that the Duke of Sussex and his wife have done little to support the mental well-being of his brother William, the Prince of Wales, or his wife, Catherine.

The Waleses 'have had to put up with the most disgraceful personal criticism from Harry and Meghan on television and in Harry’s book while being unable to answer back publicly,' writes The Daily Mail's Diary Editor.

He also takes online fans of Harry and Meghan to task for alleging - without foundation - that William and Catherine had somehow failed to support Meghan when she was experiencing difficulties of her own as a member of the Royal Family.
. . .
Today, things are very different. They seemed worlds apart as they marked World Mental Health Day on Tuesday.
. . .
'William and Catherine have had to put up with more sniping from Harry and Meghan’s cheerleaders,' writes Eden.
. . .
'They claimed the Waleses’ concern for mental health issues was only skin deep because they had ‘failed’ to support Meghan when she was suffering problems of her own

'This is grossly unfair. Harry previously praised his brother for encouraging him to seek help when he was suffering mental challenges after serving in Afghanistan.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12622203/Harry-Meghan-attacks-William-Kate-mental-disgrace.html#article-12622203
According 2 Taz:

TV EVANGELISTS - Or Cult Leaders

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZObVWrJPzaw

Fifi LaRue said…
@Mel: Sandie thinks the vastly different faces is due to her masks which is an interesting idea...but IMO Mrs. Hawwy's ever changing looks are bizarre and not normal. It's not just the heavy bronzer or lack of bronzer, her face actually changes. I think Mrs. Hawwy got mixed up in her head about who she was at the mental health conference. She went there dressed as if she was at an evening event. Daytime Mrs. Hawwy disappeared and the nighttime Mrs. Hawwy showed up. Bizarre.
@Sandy
Could you please share the link to archived newspaper stories? Is it easy to find what you’re looking for there? I’d like to read an article that appeared recently in the New York Times. Thanks!
Sandie said…
@Golden Retriever
I am not sure to which New York Times article you are referring. If I posted an excerpt from Reddit, then a link to the full article was not given.
-----

Jan Moir of the DM mentioned the duo in her column today. The rest of the article is a long declaration about the conflict in the Middle East, so I have only posted the relevant bits:

"There isn't a situation in the world that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex can't make worse by eagerly inserting themselves into the narrative.

In a statement released on Wednesday, the breathless couple condemned 'all acts of terrorism and brutality' following the Hamas attack on Israel. So caring yet also so terribly, terribly neutral — just in case they antagonise someone who might be useful in the future.

Or perhaps there is a more noble reason behind their careful impartiality? That would be marvellous, if true.

Yet in a word salad splashed with their usual oily dressing of corporate banal-speak, the Sussexes added that they were 'supporting our partners and organisations on the frontlines in Israel to provide the urgent aid needed'.

What does that mean? Archewell is building a new pipeline to pump in fresh water for the besieged Palestinians? Or free copies of Meghan's children's book The Bench are available for anyone sending a stamped addressed envelope to Cloud Cuckoo Land, California. ...

Apologies for going on about Meghan, but what on earth was she wearing at that mental health summit in NYC? In her shoulderless jacket she looked like she was emerging from a roll of cream carpet.

Are bare shoulders even appropriate for a daytime serious seminar on Oh-How-I've-Suffered-and-So-Has-He? Hate to be a prude, but I think not."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-12625359/JAN-MOIR-Charles-William-Harry-Meghan-royales.html
-----

@Fifi LaRue
One thing we do agree on is that there is something rather bizarre going in with TBW that looks suspiciously like she has crossed over to irretrievable craziness. You do make an excellent point in saying that this is way beyond simply 'masks slipping'. We are a collection of experts here (simply by a combination of experience of the subject and astute intelligence), so we can recognize something is off!

I have perhaps become fixed in my idea that she is a toxic malignant narcissist. How does this personality disorder describe her behaviour in her latest outing, which reminds me of the dress she 'adjusted' to make it off the shoulder for Trooping the Colour? I am not sure, but not only does she seem to be unaware of just how bad some clothes look on her (and the people who dress her seem just as oblivious), but she seems clueless about the meaning of the occasion where she will be appearing.
I wonder what Surgeon General Murthy made of it all? Could he get a word in edgeways? He is a doctor, after all.

To my delight, I discovered that he was born in Huddersfield, in God's Own Country - his family moved to the other side of the Atlantic when he was but months old. Nevertheless, Yorkshire folk are known for their blunt speaking so I'd like to think that somehow he absorbed this by a kind of osmosis from the very air, in the very short time he was with us.
Is her `gift' of wearing the wrong thing, whether at a daytime business meeting or being introduced to our future king and queen, a manifestation ( in the original sense) of her Oppositional Defiant Disorder?
Sandie said…
We are all saying it! I found this comment on Reddit:

-----
umbleUriahHeep
the revolution will not be Spotified
15m
Repeating myself, but I do believe that marrying into the RF broke Meghan. It unmoored her from reality and confirmed her delusional aspirations. Becoming royal was the catalyst for NPD mental breakdown. She went full on Norma Desmond.

https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/176s3g1/tabloids_released_ne_life_style/

(I don't get the reference to Norma Desmond though. A TV show I never saw?)
I've just unearthed a copy of the Telegraph of Thursday 28th December 2017. Page 4 is almost entirely devoted to H - apart from a v. short piece, `Met chief calls for funding to fight Knife crime,' and an ad for cheap holidays in Cyprus. Together they occupy less than a quarter of the page.

H had been on the Today programme - there's a large photo of him looking happy, healthy and almost wholesome, and a smaller one of him and his father, the latter answering the questions put him by H on the show.

Across top of page:

Prince Harry on the Today Show

`Meghan loved her royal Christmas with the family she's never had'
by Camilla Turner

This is 9 column inches largely of H raving about what a wonderful time they'd had:

`"It was fantastic, she really enjoyed it." later, he added: It's the family that, I suppose, she's never had."' Also, `"The family `loved having her there"' -`"great fun"`, `"amazing time"' "fantastic"` and so on.

The piece ends by damning her family, telling us that her father had been declared bankrupt in June 2016, that drunken half-bro Thomas had been arrested for threatening his girlfriend with a gun, and that Samantha had multiple sclerosis and hadn't spoken to MM for 9 years.

Then something like another 8 column inches by Steve Bird, headed Charles proud of son for embracing his long-running campaign on climate change which ends with a sting in the tail:

`His father replied; "Well darling boy, it makes me very proud to think that you understand."
Prince Harry added "And that I am listening." To which his father replied: "That's even more amazing".

Finally, there are about 12 column inches headed

Social media is damaging us, Obama warns Harry, also by Camilla Turner

Obama was H's star guest but, looking back, it's clear that H didn't even listen, still less take on board what he was saying. He missed " how do we harness this technology in a way that allows a multiplicity of voices, allows a diversity of views...but...continues to promote ways of finding common ground. And, I'm not sure government can legislate that".

H clearly wasn't even listening.
PS Have just seen on p25 of that old DT:

`Stars must speak for those without a voice'
As he makes hid directing debut, Top screen writer Aaron Sorkin talks Hollywood shame and career anxiety with Ben Lawrence.

What stands out for me is that in 3 paragraphs almost at the end, he harks back to the era `when Senator McCarthy's hounding of suspected Communists ripped through the heart of a creative community.'

Of himself, he says, `I would have been on a list. I am a Jewish writer who, from me to time, writes about politics and who criticises the government.' He expects that he too would have been `hauled in front of the committee'.

H and * need to be reminded of the McCarthy era, although they might well see it as a instructions for how to silence the enemy.
SwampWoman said…
Sandie said: So the rumor is that Meghan Markle was having lunch with David Mayor de Rothschild, the billionaire philanthropist WHOS DATING ANGELINA JOLIE, but apparently he was told the lunch was to include Harry, and as soon as he was made aware that Harry wasn’t coming, he excused himself and LEFT HER THERE ALONE! Makes you wonder how Angelina might feel about having the GRIFTER OF THE CENTURY trying to run a confidence scam on her new man? Angelina is stunning and she’s an ACTUAL HUMANITARIAN, PHILANTHROPIST AND AN INCREDIBLY TALENTED ACTOR! Nutmeg really needs to adjust her self awareness. It’s these kinds of stories that guarantee she’ll never have any A-list friends. Just saying.

Angelina Jolie is reportedly equally batshit crazy. (Okay, ILBW has never carried a vial of blood on a necklace around her neck from her latest squeeze. She also hasn't shared incestual kisses with her brother. We may conclude that AJ is MORE crazy than MM.) She also has a considerable fortune (isn't after him for money) and is much more beautiful.
OKay said…
@Sandie Others may have addressed this by the time my comment is published, but Norma Desmond was the lead female character in Sunset Boulevard, a film from 1950. Norma was a faded silent-film actress. It's really quite a good movie. Wikipedia describes her as living in a "deranged fantasy world, where she dreams of making a triumphant return to the screen." Sounds somewhat familiar, no?
Maneki Neko said…
@Sandie

You referred to Norma Desmond upthread and the name of the character rang a bell. I looked it up to refresh my memory. She was a character in the 1950 film Sunset Boulevard and portrayed by Gloria Swanson. The link below has a very good analysis of the character - it sounds like a description of * and is a must read - but I'll quote this bit which sums up her perfectly.

Personality… impatient, snobby, and selfish. Norma’s delusions of grandeur are not exactly subtle. She walks and talks like she’s still the queen of the universe. As Joe describes her, she is “sleepwalking along the gay heights of a lost career.”


https://tinyurl.com/5b3ds3u2
Norma Desmond, played by Gloria Swanson, was a central character in Sunset Boulevard (1950).

According to Wikipedia:

`The film stars William Holden as Joe Gillis, a struggling screenwriter, and Gloria Swanson as Norma Desmond, a former silent-film star who draws him into her deranged fantasy world, where she dreams of making a triumphant return to the screen'.

The denouement:

`As Joe leaves the house, Norma shoots him three times, and he falls into the pool.

The flashback ends and the film returns to the present day, with Desmond about to be arrested for murder. Norma's mansion is overrun with police and reporters. Having lost all touch with reality, Norma believes the newsreel cameras are there to film Salome instead. Max "directs" Norma for her scene and the police play along. As the cameras roll, Norma descends her grand staircase for her close up*. Overcome with emotion, she stops and makes an impromptu speech about how happy she is to be making a film again. Norma continues walking towards the camera, a look of insanity in her eyes, her descent into madness. Screen fades to black.'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVi1NlYBljU

*Origin of `Ready for my close-up, Mr DeMille'.

Yep, very prescient. Perhaps we ought to call her `Norma'.
The trailer on IMDb gives a flavour of it too:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0043014/

Yes, the Harkles are Norma and Joe - for real.
Sandie said…
@WBBM and all others who posted about Norma Desmond ...
Wow! Norma indeed! That is so creepy because TBW has the delusions of grandeur and disconnect with reality.
-----

https://archive.ph/2023.10.13-161058/https://www.dailystar.co.uk/showbiz/us-showbiz/meghan-markle-considering-reality-tv-31183654?int_source=amp_continue_reading&int_medium=amp&int_campaign=continue_reading_button%23amp-readmore-target

TBW teaming up with the Kardashians to do a cameo on their show, and other collaborations? Essentially the same story here:

https://archive.ph/2023.10.13-160806/https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/lifestyle-buzz/meghan-markle-considering-surprise-cameo-role-in-hugely-popular-reality-tv-show/ar-AA1iabxN
Sandie said…
I don't think I shared the latest Palace Confidential. The most interesting part (relevant excerpt below) is when the team used AI to 'reimagine' royals and come up with the pics. It is very well done and quite startling.


https://youtu.be/tJ7XnMNR2tQ?si=ZkCSfS9VFB1njq87
Fifi LaRue said…
@Sandi: Mrs. Hawwy is bat sh*t crazy, ODD, MPD, Narcissist, and a whole lot other disorders just emerging. It's what classically called a cluster*ck of personality disorders. Haha!
Magatha Mistie said…

Taxi

Norma and Norman
both seem to share
Delusional fantasies
they’re not all there
Norma projects
whilst simulating a chair
And Norman berates
his mother, for being spare…

Magatha Mistie said…

@WildBoar

Ready for my close-up, Meister Backgrid

@Sandie

Thanks for the `reimagination'! Not many Normas, thank goodness.

On the other hand, it's a timely reminder of what ER's children were like in their youth, when even Andrew looked a gorgeous hunk - no kidding! King Charles, as a young prince, was never rated very highly in the press - they focussed overmuch on his ears and Adam's apple . Its a shame that they omitted William's glorious hair. Both Ann and Queen C were unfairly given stick for being horse-faced. And nobody paid much attention to Edward except to ridicule him.

Looking back, all Queen Elizabeth's children were personable, in a era when nobody expected perfection and nobody thought of altering their faces unless they were truly grotesque. One was expected to accept what features developed. There's an honesty about their surgically-intact faces, perhaps what architects call `truth to materials'.

Four royal brides, Diana, Camilla, Sophie & Catherine, admittedly all had good features to start with but they still made/make the best of themselves, wearing what suits them and being well-groomed. Any adjustments, such as having teeth straightened, were minor, and not out of the ordinary.

As for the other 2, the reimagined H reminds me of Harry Enfield's character Kevin Paterson

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_the_Teenager
and
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lqm8JGnSshE

As for the other one, the less said the better.
Sandie said…
@MM
Norma and Norman! (I get the reference to Norman - psycho killer in the shower; Hitchcock.) You are brilliant!
-----

Vogue has recently become an avid fan of TBW. It joins the chorus of those desperately trying to manifest a 'Suits reboot'. Producer, director and so on all say it is not going to happen (also pointing out that there is a writers' strike), but the Vogue writer gushingly persists like a deranged idiot.

Note that Vogue is offering this as a complimentary article with a message urging you to subscribe to the magazine. Are they simply using her to try and get subscribers?

https://www.vogue.com/article/suits-companion-series-news
BTW There have been comments on SMM about the Royals having to `stay out of politics'. As I understand it, the convention is more about staying out of UK party politics and they are careful not to be seen favouring one POTUS lest it jeopardises the UK's relationship with the next.

Rather like, as Prince Philip put it like not being looking enthusiastic about one biscuit factory's product when on a visit, lest it upset other biscuit-making company.
@Magatha

That's great!

Would that be Norman as in `Norman Bates'?

OTOH, I see echoes in them of the themes of Whatever Happened to Baby Jane (imprisonment, toxic sibling rivalry, alcohol abuse and self-inflicted disability) but can't quite decide which of them is Jane and which Blanche
Of course, we shouldn't mock the afflicted.

It's possible that the King is mindful of the criticism which would be directed at him, the family and possibly the entire nation, should he do anything which might be construed as punishment of the Sussexes.

I'm thinking of the case of Prince John (1905 - 1919), youngest child of Geo V & Queen Mary, brother of David (Edward VII/DK Of Windsor) and Albert (King Geo VI). It came up a few years ago and was used unjustly to smear the present family, for all that it was a century ago.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_John_of_the_United_Kingdom
John's seclusion has subsequently been brought forward as evidence of inhumanity by the royal family. Contrary to the belief that he was hidden from the public from an early age, however, John for most of his life had the role of a fully fledged member of the family, appearing frequently in public until after his eleventh birthday, when his condition became severe

More recently, we were reminded that 2 of the Queens's cousins, in the Bowes Lyon family, were also disabled mentally:

Daily Telegraph, 14th Nov 2020 Neglected, hidden away, registered dead: the tragic true story of the Queen’s disabled cousins'
An episode in the new series of The Crown sheds light on a little-known – and long-obscured – stain upon the Royal family’s reputation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerissa_and_Katherine_Bowes-Lyon

I wonder how many of the critics have ever had experience of an elderly family member with advanced dementia, whose needs cannot be met at home? Has to be cared for by professionals, NHS or private sector, in residential care? Who fails to recognise them? Who may have been `sectioned’ for attacking them?

Take it from me, it’s emotionally very hard to visit them; not to feel that it’s a pointless waste of time; and it’s guilt-inducing to know that one can do no more than is already being done.

If it is finally acknowledged that H & * are mentally impaired to a significant extent, true victims of their own personalities and self-inflicted drug and alcohol abuse, it will elicit great sympathy for them consequently major criticism of the King and his family.
Sandie said…
https://youtu.be/WjRPJRmj7M4?si=9BBNp8C04dy2sRIL

Lost Beyond Pluto talks about why have the duo not been cancelled. I think her ideas are quite interesting: shamelessness, and they create their own 'platform' so no one can take it away from them.

I think they do still depend on organisations giving them a platform, and awards (has the wheel run dry for the latter?), but there are plenty of those around that they can use up. Of course, organizing their own events and own awards is too much hard work. IG works for them because it is already set up, other people are in place to do all the organizing, wounded veterans (and countries to draw from, hence extending participation) are aplenty, and the royal link is worth a lot to them. Social media is a dangerous zone for them ... not only are they too lazy to do the work, but they are very vulnerable to cancellation there. Actually creating a brand product to sell, or even endorse, is too risky because cancellation would destroy them.

If they lose IG, it would be a major blow to them. They have lost other brands that they used to use for appearances: One Young World, World Kitchen (I think that is its name) ...
Girl with a Hat said…
@Sandie, you are a constant source of great information! thank you
Girl with a Hat said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Girl with a Hat said…
does anyone else see the resemblance of Jada Pinkett Smith with *? the facial expressions in these photos are very similar to those that * uses often

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-12628961/Jada-Pinkett-Smith-Willow-Jaden-relieved-pretend-marriage.html

duper's delight in the last photo
After count Nikolai of Monpezat considered it to be smart idea to brag in a Raffles hotels' advert that he was his royal highness prince Nikolai of Denmark when he was not, he was just his highness prince N., queen Margrethe of Denmark took his and his siblings' royal titles away. She understood something his younger son Joachim did not: You can't use royal titles for money earning purposes when the head of your royal house is the official head of your country. It is that simple.

A very good question is why does king Charles accept that his "arrogant, entitled, low IQ, condescending, patronizing, conceited, pompous, self-important, smug, egotistical, elitist, narcissistic, self righteous buffoon"* of a son can monetize his title, put his nose in political life of an another independent state, brag his illegal drug use and try to destroy the Royal House of Britain and he doesn't do anything? When is too much of all this just.... too much? Does it not feel embarrassing that his dignity as a head of state is suffering?

Not to mention how the whole world and his aunt are discussing the true status of a "prince" and a "princess" of Sussex.

* thanks for the quotation to twitter HarrysGreySuit
SwampWoman said…
Okay, it's October, how many of you are preordering Omid Scobie's tell all book for the skeet shooter on your Christmas list?

/Their Royal Highnesses Catherine and Camilla, perhaps?

I've been asking for Christmas wants/needs for the peoples on my list like grandchildren, so I expect everybody else is doing the same.
Hikari said…
Wild Boar,

Recent events have made me more interested in the previous generations of the Royal family, including the siblings of the Queen’s late father. In the case of prince John, I really feel for all concerned… The little prince himself, his sister and brothers, his parents and the staff members who cared for him. Back in those days there’s simply were not the resources for disabled children that there are today, and further complicating matters, John was not from a regular family—he was a Royal. It seems to me that his parents kept him at home as long as they could and after it was apparent that he could not function without constant specialized care, they set him at at Wood Farm with his own household staff, including his devoted nurse who never left him. Though he was often lonely for playmates and missed his siblings, he was not neglected. While this arrangement Allowed George and Mary to tuck their problematic child away in the country, it also benefited John who was not thriving at court. The boy discovered a love for and a knack for gardening and could always be outside amongst his plants. Some children from the neighborhood would come play with him, and his mother and siblings visited frequently. All save one— The prince of Wales, who spoke freely of his disgust at the defective. David was a cruel boy who grew into a cruel and useless man and had the life he deserved in my opinion. I can’t judge John’s parents harshly for how they handled their son. It seems that John’s last years at Wood Farm were happy ones, In so far as he could be happy with his conditions. As the chosen retreat of Prince Philip and his last years, it must be a peaceful and bucolic place. I guess John’s official diagnosis was severe epilepsy combined most probably with autistic spectrum disorder, something which was not really recognized at the time.
1 – 200 of 616 Newer Newest

Popular posts from this blog

Is This the REAL THING THIS TIME? or is this just stringing people along?

Recently there was (yet another) post somewhere out in the world about how they will soon divorce.  And my first thought was: Haven't I heard this before?  which moved quickly to: how many times have I heard this (through the years)? There were a number of questions raised which ... I don't know.  I'm not a lawyer.  One of the points which has been raised is that KC would somehow be shelling out beaucoup money to get her to go "away".  That he has all this money stashed away and can pull it out at a moment's notice.  But does he? He inherited a lot of "stuff" from his mother but ... isn't it a lot of tangible stuff like properties? and with that staff to maintain it and insurance.  Inside said properties is art, antique furniture and other "old stuff" which may be valuable" but ... that kind of thing is subject to the whims and bank accounts of the rarified people who may be interested in it (which is not most of us in terms of bei

A Quiet Interlude

 Not much appears to be going on. Living Legends came and went without fanfare ... what's the next event?   Super Bowl - Sunday February 11th?  Oscar's - March 10th?   In the mean time, some things are still rolling along in various starts and stops like Samantha's law suit. Or tax season is about to begin in the US.  The IRS just never goes away.  Nor do bills (utility, cable, mortgage, food, cars, security, landscape people, cleaning people, koi person and so on).  There's always another one.  Elsewhere others just continue to glide forward without a real hint of being disrupted by some news out of California.   That would be the new King and Queen or the Prince/Princess of Wales.   Yes there are health risks which seemed to come out of nowhere.  But.  The difference is that these people are calmly living their lives with minimal drama.  

Christmas is Coming

 The recent post which does mention that the information is speculative and the response got me thinking. It was the one about having them be present at Christmas but must produce the kids. Interesting thought, isn't it? Would they show?  What would we see?  Would there now be photos from the rota?   We often hear of just some rando meeting of rando strangers.  It's odd, isn't it that random strangers just happen to recognize her/them and they have a whole conversation.  Most recently it was from some stranger who raved in some video (link not supplied in the article) that they met and talked and listened to HW talk about her daughter.  There was the requisite comment about HW of how she is/was so kind).  If people are kind, does the world need strangers to tell us (are we that kind of stupid?) or can we come to that conclusion by seeing their kindness in action?  Service. They seem to always be talking about their kids, parenthood and yet, they never seem to have the kids