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
The recent acrimonious split and dragging through child custody court of her estranged ex Brad Pitt really revealed Angelina Jolie‘s true colors. AJ is a quintessential child of Hollywood. I wonder if it’s actually possible to grow up in the rarefied fishbowl of Hollywood As the top of the pile of celebrity kids and insanely beautiful to boot and not turn out narcissistic. I kind of think not. The reason that she and Brad clashed as partners is because even though Brad is her male equal in looks and clout, He didn’t grow up with this. He was raised in small town Missouri by modest middle-class parents who worked a regular jobs and he had a regular all American childhood. He just happened to be insanely good looking and with looks like that it was inevitable probably that he would become an actor. After blowing into our consciousness with a small supporting role in Thelma and Louise, the next year he costarred in A River Runs Through It directed by Robert Redford and blew our socks off. In both looks and his acting style he hearkened back exactly to a young Redford, and if Bob had sent out a casting call for a 20-something doppelgänger of himself at that age, he couldn’t have done better. Brad has made some mistakes since then, chiefly in using substances to cope and dumping his wife Jennifer Aniston in favor of the high maintenance likely eating disordered Narc he left her for. He wanted children and Jennifer preferred to birth a vapid rom com or two every year instead. Brad fell for Angie’s Earth Mother act, but his Midwestern values would run smack into her Hollyweird parenting style especially regarding her two older adopted sons. When Brad dared to actually act as a father to her children and discipline them according to normal healthy parenting standards, he found himself devalued and discarded with breathless alacrity. I suppose he and Johnny Depp have a lot to commiserate about. Wonder if they’ve swapped phone numbers.
Whatever Angelina’s failings as a person and a mother… And she does seem to be suffering from a sort of emotional crack up brought on by health issues and aging… Both hard for a celebrated beauty to cope with, she was at least at one time in a better place and was anointed a UNICEF ambassador And she is the undisputed natural mother of three children. Her acting ability may be a bit less prodigious than she is given credit for, but she is 1 million Miles more talented than Harry’s wife. Watch the movie “Salt” which is I think her best work. I’ve watched some of her interviews, and although I was primed to dislike her, she comes across as articulate and intelligent… Two things which Harry’s wife believes her self to be but is manifestly neither. Angelina does not deal in word salad, and she has the heir of someone who can get things done, not just by being a bitch, but because she is competent. A. is one of the icons that Harry’s wife is always shamelessly ripping off. She may indeed have mental disorders too but she has accomplished a lot more in her life. Harry’s wife has accomplished absolutely nothing except chaos and destruction. As she enters mid life, Angelina does seem to be unraveling and her heyday is most likely behind her. She got a huge boost her self for being 1/2 of Brangelina… But in my opinion it was always Brad driving that star power. Due to her outrageous beauty and Controversia reputation, and Angie’s always been polarizing. Talented, but also an unstable exhibitionistic man eater who is untrustworthy. That’s my bead on her. Brad Pitt on the other hand is universally loved to the extent that even the crummy action of cheating on his wife was forgiven by all except maybe Jennifer Aniston. So when Angelina came after Brad with claws and fangs out attempting to destroy his reputation and his career over obligations of child and spousal and substance abuse, She really only shot herself in her skinny foot. Her actions were straight out of the Narc playbook But they backfired on her just as they did on fellow Narc Amber Heard when the judge dismissed them.
The Hollywood narcs are just crawling out of the woodwork like cockroaches. I agree that Jada Pinkett Smith meets all the markers for a malignant Narcissist. I used to think that she was cute back in the day but I see now that tiny package House is a monstrous operator. When I look at her face, I see the Smug face of evil. In fact, Jada might be the Narc Queen, with the likes of Amber, Angie and Megdusa only her handmaidens. Recently, Jada announced an interview that she and Will Smith have been living separate lives for the last 7 years. But it was only at last year’s Oscar show that Will Smith physically assaulted Chris Rock for a perceived insult to his wife’s lack of hair. Frankly, that whole episode suggested to me that Will is not a man under his own control But he was actually under some kind of mind control of his wife’s. Like a hypnotic suggestion… Why otherwise would he risk throwing away his entire reputation and career? A normal husband in control of himself might have Punched Chris rock after the show, but not while cameras were rolling on live TV to a global audience. Will Smith is Jada’s performing monkey, and She enjoys watching him debase himself over her. This impression was further confirmed after I watched a joint interview with the two of them in which Jayda did nearly all the talking and freely admitted that they had an open marriage And she took full advantage of it and had no shortage of bed partners… that her current side piece was in his 20s. All of this while her husband sat across from her at the table looking like a beaten dog. I remember a time not so long ago, when their children were still young before Will had entered the devaluation phase, When JPS bragged in magazine articles about her supernova sex life with her husband. That was then. Now he hast to sit by and listen to her brag About her conquest of boys little older than their son. It’s a sick dynamic. But he must get something out of it on a twisted level because he wouldn’t have to stay. The only reason she’s had a career was because she piggybacked onto his brighter star. If they officially divorce, I’m sure she’s arranged an ironclad legal way to take all of his money.
Compared to Jada Pinkett Smith, Harry’s wife is a rote amateur. If Methane were actually intelligent enough and able to function as an adult rather than a toddler, She’d be much more dangerous. As it is, she outs herself due to her impulsive and childish instant gratification mentality.
. . .
A photo taken by a passer-by on Friday shows the pair leaving a gourmet food store inside the Sandy Lane Yacht Club and Marina in Glossy Bay.
Meghan, 42, is wearing a simple ivory maxi-dress and a ribboned Panama hat while husband Harry, 39, is casual in navy shorts and a white t-shirt and flip flops. Looking weird in that long dress and of course, the trusted old Panama hat. More in this riveting DM article (I skimmed it briefly) about the love story of the century (they're holidaying sans enfants).
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12630623/Harry-Meghan-seen-strolling-hand-hand-romantic-holiday-uber-posh-Canouan-Island-Grenadines.html
After a week in New York, without children, they jet off to Canouan Island for a holiday, without children. It does not seem normal to me. (I do believe that the children exist and are their children, even if not born of the body.)
You mention the siblings of George VI, of whom perhaps only No1 child, David, and No 2, Albert are well-known stateside, as Edward VIII/Duke of Windsor and Bertie, Duke of York/ George VI.
There were 5 in all, the others being: George, Dk of Kent; Henry, Dk of Gloucester; Prince John and Princess Mary, the Princess Royal. Four of these led blameless lives but George Duke of Kent had more in common with H, regarding sex & drugs, and with David in his political opinions.
Mystery still hangs over Geo Kent. He was in the RAF during the War. He and his family were evacuated to a gentry house in Fife, presumably requisitioned from the owners who were obliged to live elsewhere in Scotland` for the duration'.
When in May 1941, Rudolf Hess, Deputy Fuhrer, betook himself to Scotland, landing by parachute south of Glasgow, he claimed to be on a `peace mission' in 1941 and asked to be taken to the Duke of Hamilton, the local bigwig. Stories vary as to whether Hamilton expected his guest or not. It was strongly suspected, however, that he meant the Duke of Kent, despite being 30-odd miles off course.
Hess was put in the Tower. In August 1942, George died in an air crash, ostensibly en route for Iceland. The bald facts are here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbeath_air_crash
It's worth having a look at the references at he bottom of the page.
Was the idea to get Kent well out the way ,where he couldn't get up to mischief? Or was it, as the Germans claimed, more sinister than that?
` ...looking weird in that long dress inspired by pancake ice...'
Most parents I've known are eager to produce evidence of the entire family having a whale of a time at the seaside or in the snow. True, there have been one or two photos of them away from home, apart from their `Royal' tour in SA, but nothing to suggest they've been away for any decent length of time.
Could it be that parents of borrowed children draw the line at letting them go on holiday with with Norma & Norman?
According to an insider, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have remained very close to Princess Eugenie and Princess Beatrice, which has "left the Royal family worried" about what palace information the Montecito-based duo could end up hearing, as per Heat Magazine.
The Duke and Duchess are said to have caught up with Eugenie and her husband Jack Brooksbank recently, with reports even claiming they jetted off to Portugal together where they had a "wonderful time". It was also revealed that Harry and Meghan are even planning on hosting Eugenie and Jack in California over the holiday season.
"They've got so much in common: the kids, a shared interest in philanthropy, and Harry enjoys offering advice to his cousin about how to further her career, while Meghan's great with parenting, lifestyle, and nutrition," the insider spilled.
Eugenie isn't the only relative still close with Prince Harry and Meghan though, because Harry's other cousin Beatrice is quite "fond" of the duo, as is her husband Edo. And according to a source, the two sisters have shown "loyalty and compassion" to (rest of sentence missed ng in article)
But this bond is said to be causing a stir inside the palace, with them supposedly "worried" that the friendship could lead to a "new royal feud". Speaking to the outlet, an insider said: "For the King, Camilla, and the Waleses, it's rather unfortunate that Eugenie and Beatrice are so close with the Sussexes."
The insider added that these fears are cropping up because Beatrice and Eugenie are "still privy to a lot of what's happening inside Buckingham Palace, so there's a concern about what they're telling them, and what they could reveal - even unintentionally".
https://archive.md/2023.10.12-131848/https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/us-celebrity-news/harry-meghans-new-royal-feud-31167946
Source is obviously TBW ... although I could imagine hapless talking such drivel as well, and both love causing trouble and conflict. Eugenie and Jack are still close to the duo ... plenty of evidence of that. But if either is listening nicely to 'advice' from the dastardly duo, they are being polite. There is no evidence of th.being clise with Beatrice and Edo, although I would not put it above the duo to harass them with messages and calls.
I can’t decide if that’s equally or more risible than “*’s great with parenting, lifestyle and nutrition.” Ha! That’s our Megz… Always marketing. That doesn’t sound like the report of a family visit; it’s a pitch for a media deal.
Well, this absolute toffee was whipped up by Mugsie, Likely writing her own copy. Now that E. Is based in Lisbon, and recently had a second baby, she’s probably no longer working for her art gallery which at last check was her career apart from being a royal princess and a mother of two. Is this the career which Hairball is offering her advice in advancing? After all, he got an O-Level in art after his teacher did his project for him. Definitely well placed to be giving his cousin pointers. Or perhaps he’s schooling her in the art of royally grifting off his father, the King? That’s more like it. The wife of course “birthed two children” yonks before E. gave birth herself so she’s a maternal expert and yoga practitioner as we know. And the health benefits of daily cannabis usage and red wine flavonoids are well documented… Particularly for nursing mothers.
Tosh!! Yes, the Brooksbankses have seemed chummy with HazNowt and the Baggage in the past, but I think that’s over. The notion that the spare to the disgraced Duke of York Is or frankly ever has been privy to Palace secrets… And now would still be while residing in another country is laughable. E. Appeared to make small talk with her cousin while they were waiting for a ride from the coronation, but he obviously said something to visibly upset her, probably about her gravid condition— Because he’s an ass. The fact that Beatrice and Edo are invoked here reeks of desperation because I steadfastly do not believe B. &E. Have interacted with the toxic couple in any significant way since their marriage. Beatrice has kept herself well out of her sister’s dramas with the Twats, And indeed it’s been rumored for several years now that E.’s contact with the Monte$hits had been a source of estrangement between the York sisters. Andrew has only just been welcomed back to family events… A generous gesture on the part of the King, Considering their past history. Beatrice would not jeopardize that for her father even Eugenie would.
I don’t believe a word because you know who wrote it.
Thanks for bringing to my attention one of the more bizarre espionage stories connected to the war of which I was not previously aware. I was aware of the name Rudolf Hess, Deputy Fuhrer, but i’d had no idea that this high ranking person in the Nazi regime was captured and imprisoned so early in the war, and so rapidly dismissed by his own side as an insane loose cannon. I found this article from the Smithsonian about the incident which is very interesting. Surprisingly perhaps none other than Winston Churchill wrote of Hess quite compassionately, detailing this incident as a misguided diplomatic mission and that Hess should be considered “a medical case”— IE giving some dispensation for insanity.
In researching a bit about the plane crash in Scotland in 1941, one of the sources, now discredited alleges that the mystery passenger who still remains unidentified was actually Hess Being clandestinely transported to Sweden. Since Rudolph has demonstrably died by suicide in Spandau prison in 1987, that theory was obviously Whoo-Whoo. The other leading contender is that the mystery passenger was the civilian lover of the duke, ostensibly a male person. How could a woman have been smuggled aboard a military transport on a top-secret mission? It certainly appears that George had an extremely colorful life. What a shame that so many others had to die with him though. That’s the other thing I had not realized, that the Duke’s fatal flight was not a solo one. You seem to imply that perhaps the flight was sabotaged to take out the Duke of Kent owing to his Nazi sympathies. As alleged in numerous articles, the relative of the sole Survivor of the crash insist that the Duke himself was the pilot and that the surviving man had dragged his body from the cockpit.
Would a saboteur have viewed 14 other British lives as acceptable collateral damage, or was this crash due to pilot error? So many questions… Prince Michael was at the time a seven week old newborn, so I certainly feel sorry for George’s children and his widow. The more I find out about the late Queen’s family, the more remarkable she… and her father…seem, To have lived their lives so impeccably without any scandal or grievous fatal flaws of character… Perhaps apart from George VI’s addiction to tobacco. If only
he’d been able to master that, what might subsequent history have looked like?
We have the cards that have been dealt. Long live the King and the Prince of Wales.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/will-we-ever-know-why-nazi-leader-rudolf-hess-flew-scotland-middle-world-war-ii-180959040/
Thus they seem to be at Sandy Lane Yacht Club and Residences, facing Shenanagins Beach Club.
How very appropriate.
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=panama%20hat
I mentioned the stupid Panama hat too - she takes one everywhere - and should have known there was a hidden meaning. I can understand why you gave the link but didn't copy the meaning, decency precludes writing anything too specific on this blog 😁
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/178gyap/harry_markle_blog_how_to_alienate_farmers/
H has just insulted another large group of people - farmers.
He's being savaged for his bloody stupid assumptions, this time about the world's rural folk. We do have a problem about broadband provision in rural areas but that's not the same as farmers being ignorant of social media.
He's being savaged for his bloody stupid assumptions, this time about the world's rural folk. We do have a problem about broadband provision in rural areas but that's not the same as farmers being ignorant of social media.
Imo, farmers are some of the smartest people on earth. They have to be a jack-of-all-trades out of necessity and possess inherent common sense,i.e., a mechanic, soil conservationist, animal husbandry, weather forecaster, nature observer, pest control, business negotiator, etc. Small and medium sized farms have minimal margins of profit with some years the harvest crop unprofitable owing to govt price controls and unpredictable weather. Harry is a mental midget and keeps proving my point every time he opens his mouth.
Question to all Nutties— Do you think * is still being represented by WME? I ask because all the crap pr someone is pushing out and paying for, is only sinking her popularity here in the US. She’s a laughingstock now in the US. Who the heck is advising the duo? The separate brand mantra from earlier this year didn’t work for * and her only visibility in 2023 not in a parking lot was taking control at Harry’s gigs. Is WME still representing * ?
Question to all Nutties— Do you think * is still being represented by WME? I ask because all the crap pr someone is pushing out and paying for, is only sinking her popularity here in the US. She’s a laughingstock now in the US. Who the heck is advising the duo? The separate brand mantra from earlier this year didn’t work for * and her only visibility in 2023 not in a parking lot was taking control at Harry’s gigs. Is WME still representing * ?
Good question. WME has been rather quiet lately on that subject. Ostensibly it was they who arranged for the Twats to attend Kevin Costner's event . . with that many movers and shakers at that benefit, those kinds of introductions is what WME is paid handsomely to make happen. But she is a toxic client. Will not be managed, will not accede to anyone else's advice. Firms like this are happy to take wealthy clients' money but only as long as the bills are getting paid and there is some viability on their investment of there professional resources and expertise. *'s retainer is not worth the damage she creates to any brand/company she's associated with. Her behavior is so polarizing, so out of bounds, even by the lenient standards for celebrity eccentricity in Hollywood, but she does not have an iota of talent or marketability to justify the work she creates for her 'partners'. Stars like Marlon Brando and Johnny Depp went off the reservation too but they had/have bankable star power. Johnny, even damaged by recent events in his personal life, is still beloved, with tons of support. Marlon was a certifiable loon but also one of the most memorable acting talents that will ever be in the history of cinema.
What is Ari Emmanual getting for his association with Hawwy's wife except egg on his face? Her behavior at Invictus and the Costner event were new heights of narcissistic insanity, even for her. It's just going to keep getting worse. Frankly I look for a statement that * and WME have parted ways owing to creative differences by the New Year if not sooner. There is simply nothing there for an agency of WME's caliber to work with. Ari may have already dumped her as a client, hence the flurry of 'parking lot merching' and 'lurved up on yet another vacation'. That's what she comes up with off her own bat. Calling Backgrid to merch more crap is low investment-high reward for her. Ari and his team have expectations that she present them with something viable to market her for deals and she ain't got **** to offer. She continues to be a legend in her own mind and Hawwy likewise--but he is not part of the WME deal, to my knowlege, just her.
In this house, we to kept up until about 2010, when adult education more or less disappeared. Now, without grandchildren or even great grandchildren eager to show off their skill, we struggle. It's not a matter of where we live. Also, I'm blowed if I'm going to spend what little time I have left trying to learn how to make it work if I can avoid it.
We have a friend who's an arable farmer in East Anglia. His ploughing, sowing, reaping weeding are all controlled by computers programmes and satellite. You can't ell me he doesn't know how to send an email.
For `portrait of H as Worzel Gummidge, see
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Worzel-Gummidge-Complete-Collection-DVD/dp/B07Z74DN4J
"Formed in 1898, WME is the longest-running talent agency. In 2009, William Morris Agency (WMA) merged with Endeavor to become one of the leading entertainment and media companies with an unparalleled list of artists and content creators. In 2014, WME acquired IMG, the global leader in sports, events, media and fashion, forming Endeavor."
TBW is not a good fit for the agency. It is telling that she has been with them for many months now and they have not brokered any deals for her. On paper, WME probably thought they could work with her when they signed her ... she is supposedly an actress but they have found no roles for her (Costner does not seem to be keen on her starring in Bodyguard II yet; the Netflix deal with the book rights was part of an existing Netflix contract); no fahion houses or beauty brands are interested (she tried hard to manifest Dior but they were not interested); and WME seem to have not been able to do anything with the Invictus Games connection. (although she has worked hard to make herself the face of that brand). They have not even geem able to establish a successful social media account for her to attract lucrative merching deals.
The duo are doing their own PR and publicity. The 'staff' they enploy are lapdogs who do what they are told as the duo (i.e. TBW) are in charge. She is a control freak and that may end up being her undoing.
Rumours are still spreading about her launching a social media site, but the date keeps being pushed out. The newest launch date is 1 November.
I’d say not only is she doing her own PR, she does her own hair, make up and styling based on the results, and I’d be willing to bet $1 million that apart from some rent-a-goons as “security/drivers” for public events that they have no staff working for them at all. If they manage to find anybody, It’s probably through agencies that send staff by the day or by the hour, because I can’t imagine her making a viable working relationship long term. Her reputation precedes her everywhere. I know you and I diverge over their parenthood, But I remain of the opinion that non-existent children do not require a staff of nannies. But even if there were a staff of nannies, The propensity of Turnip and the Mrs. to be gone for weeks at a time on consecutive jollies is notable. When the queen left five year old Charles and his three year-old sister at home for all those months, she was a monarch on progress through her realms. Far cry from merching resort wear at a beach club in the manner of Mrs. Turniphead. Two more child free hedonists it’d be hard to find.
https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2023/10/16/harolds-unconscious-bias-at-project-healthy-minds/
I think that 'this one' doesn't understand that some of us don't live and die on social media. We often prefer meeting our friends in person instead of posting endlessly on social media. We like to talk rather than text. Putting pictures of our food online instead of, call me crazy here, eating it while it's hot seems weird to me. It isn't that we don't know how to use social media, some of us just prefer not to. I really do not like anonymous people trying to stir up online drama that they seem to want to drag everybody into. Nope.
I have cut some friends out of my life that could not go five minutes without checking their phones for messages and it wasn't for work purposes but to see how people reacted to their Facebook post. If you want to meet me for lunch, fine, don't spend the entire time on your phone. If I have to make the effort to put on actual clothes, you better make the effort to talk to ME. I have a feeling that those two live online.
I completely agree! Considering how worried they are about 'security', I wonder how well-vetted the 'nannies' are?
Hawwy is his great-great Uncle David all over again; it’s quite remarkable, but Not in a good way, more like a WTF, how can that dynamic be happening all over again 90 years on??
David was a vapid and hedonistic man-baby Just like his great great nephew, but the Duke of Windsor was an avid letter writer, Who’s correspondence displays a curdled wit…his forte, the devastating nickname. Hawwy can barely write his name, so there’s a divergence.
If * winds up like Wallis in her last years, it couldn’t happen to a more deserving person.
* The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were snapped leaving the tarmac on Monday after flying to Atlanta from the Caribbean on a private flight
* DailyMail.com revealed over the weekend that the couple jetted to the tiny island of Canouan after spending a week promoting mental health projects in NYC
*The tiny Caribbean island is just three miles wide but has a reputation for being where 'billionaires go to escape millionaires'
-----
* was holding her trusted Panama hat again. The article doesn't mention if the Harkles were in Atlanta for work (!) or leisure. Of course, they had to use a private jet - noblesse oblige.
The photos of those two arriving at Atlanta airport ate by Backgrid. What are they trying to show/prove? The witch is seen pointing at something (or someone) again. In lots of photos taken by paps she's pointing at something/one. Can anyone explain?
A Sinner on SMM suggested this was a business trip - offshore accounts and the like. Or is it something to do with H's US tax or residential status?
Wealthy UK citizens `living' abroad, described as `non-domiciled' (aka `non-doms') get special UK tax exemptions as long as they're not in the UK longer than a specified period at any one time. I gather some get around this in a sneaky way by taking off in their PJs from a quiet private airfield in the evening, leaving British airspace for a couple of hours around midnight, just stooging around for a bit, before re-entering British airspace the next day, not having landed any where else. Just long enough for it to register as an overnight trip abroad.
Might this tactic be of use to H in relation to the US regulations?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/apr/07/what-is-non-domicile-status-and-who-qualifies-hmrc
Enty also explains how her agents use their client to 'raise' her value. That os what the Costner appearance was about ... gether photographed with an A-lister. Better still, call in favours and get an A-lister to appear in one of her productions.
I wonder how she is going yo make those millions from her productio s when she never seems to be working.
https://youtu.be/MZmgyCutEwg
This is interesting (from Neil Sean). It seems that hapless always called his brother William and the name Willy was made up for the memoir just for spite.
Plant has done heaps of updates ... some interesting comments.
Besides specializing in sun and fun for “billionaires who want to get away from millionaires,” Canouan is also known as a tax haven with stringent financial secrecy laws.
We already know more than one of the Harkles’ businesses are headquartered in the US state of Delaware, so I wouldn’t be one bit surprised if the main purpose of their visit was more about concealing and protecting their money and their financial dealings to keep the Internal Revenue Service and the media away than getting a tan.
H. G. Tudor does a good job over on his youtube channel explaining how Canouan is a favored place for the wealthy to avoid taxes and hide their financial activities. See “Holiday or Tax Haven” (Meghan Markle).”
Someone posited that Turnip has been using the racist narrative about his wife as a shield for his attempt at a "coup d'etat" against William. And that Turnip is allergic to accountability. He's more disordered than we know.
That's the bit that stood out for me. H couldn't do the medieval thing of demanding armed support from his feudal subordinates in order to attack his brother the future king - he used her to do his dirty work so he could be seen as having clean hands, the innocent with an evil wife.
It’s pretty telling that Turnip’s favorite movie as a child was The Lion King—in which a scheming, evil younger brother kills his elder brother, the King, and then plots against his nephew, the Crown Prince. Turnip and Diana used to watch this together by the hour.
Chilling in light of what Turnip grew up to be. I think he’d snatch the crown in a heartbeat if he had the chance, With zero fundamental understanding of what it really means to rule. All he sees is that the one with the Crown gets all of the shiny things and worship. His behavior does rise to treason in my opinion, but what is murky is whether Turnip really has the capacity of adult reason to understand the ramifications of what he’s doing. He is a big child in capable of strategic thinking in my view. If he had two brain cells to rub together he would be dangerous. As he is, he is an embittered child attacking the brother he perceives as favored to mess with William’s peace of mind, to discredit him as a racist bully With the aid of his wife, but I think it’s very short term thinking— How can I mess with William today, the tosser? He wants what William has, what he will never have, And it’s eating him up. He would never have gained the support of armed forces in a medieval coup d’etat… Brainless, devoid of charisma, devoid of a legitimate claim and profoundly cruel and unlikable on every level. It’s the same in his modern day war against his brother. No one likes Harry or considers him mentally competent. His wife is fed his delusions and they are both legendary in their own minds. No doubt many tombs will be written in future years about how the weak minded second son of King Charles III Fell prey to a Jezebel
And sought to destroy his father and brother. Perhaps the realm can only be restored to order if the renegade Prince and his handler suffer the fate of Macbeth and his toxic Queen. Maybe I should extend more compassion toward halfwits, but in the case of these two, I am fresh out.
...Enty reckons she will ditch him when she makes 20 to 30 million. For now she is aiming to be a top content creator and producer...
I don't think that 20 or 30 million is a completely impossible goal but ... over what time period? These people spend money like water.
They seem to have quite an expensive lifestyle they maintain. Always new and very, very expensive and new clothes for her at all the outings. Private jets. The mortgage payment if they do really own the house or rent if they don't (or rent in several places if other stories are to be believed). Money to pay WME and whom ever else is doing something for her.
Even if something gets produced and eventually they get money for it, it won't be that amount in the bank at the exit time. It will already be out the door for taxes and the expenses incurred trying to make that money. Investments take time to be positive cash flow. Same is true for HW productions - you get your money but it is long after your work on it. And, I once read something about HW accounting. Not that I have a strong accounting background but the text even talked about how it is crazy and like no other business.
The other thing about that kind of money is that you need periodic infusions of it as you spend it down. Residuals are one way. It looks more like IF you are a top tier producer, then you might still take you a while to accumulate that amount of money. It also takes a lot of attention to details to pull this off successfully. https://makestoryboard.com/blog/what-does-a-film-producer-do (the whole blog is very interesting).
The other part mentioned, the photo placement at the Costner event, I've read of that before. An article where someone mentioned a female star they realized was circulating, not really much in the pipeline but they were getting a lot of face time at red carpet openings. People placement, similar to product placement, to remind people of their existence and think of hiring for something.
I wonder too what they will produce. We haven't heard anything lately about the Netflix movie script deal (but I also don't have IMDB pro either).
I agree ... they spend lavishly on consumables, i.e. a lifestyle that they can't really afford and that they certainly do not need. In addition, they do not have a strong work ethic. People who succeed focus all their attention and time on work. Take, for example, Elon Musk ... he spent two years sleeping on the floor in the factory when he was building Tesla. (The story sounds a bit extreme as did he not have three marriages and 6 children in that time? But the lesson remains the same ... brilliance, hard work, sacrifices, day after day, creates the means for lasting and great wealth.)
Over time, a life as a Royal Duchess Would’ve been worth far more than the chicken feed she’s scratching around for. There are none so blind as those who will not see.
What a load of drivel about the missing engagement ring. (William is concerned because two of the diamonds came from Diana and so they are of great significance; because of the design of the ring, the diamonds came loose so she is having the ring fixed.)
This is some jeweller trying to get attention by talking a load of drivel.
William has the most important piece of Diana's jewellery - the engagement ring. Any other major pieces of jewellery associated with her are in the royal collection. I doubt that he is concerned about two small diamonds she bought after her divorce.
It does not take almost a year to fix some loose stones in a ring. Even if she lost the diamonds, they can be replaced. Maybe an epic fight between them is behind the missing engagement ring. I am speculating: she lost a stone or two from the ring; he was furious that she was so careless; harsh words were exchanged; she then refused to wear it because 'she may damage or lose it and upset him'. The woman loves diamonds; that is the biggest diamond she owns; she already had the band changed to her taste (plus he said that using his mother's diamonds in the ring was hugely important to him); and a piece of jewellery only becomes iconic if it is strongly associated with you and you wear it all the time.
Maybe she had it dismantled and kept the diamonds for future new jewellery, or sold it to build a nest egg. The story about having it fixed makes no sense but idiots keep repeating it and are not challenged by the stupid people in the media.
I think I have a superficial understanding of this 'evidence' that bots are used to make her appear popular. Bots cost money. Who is paying for this and why?
Please explain these rings to me. The first photo is from the tour when she was pregnant; I cannot place the second. But, she only got the eternity ring after the birth of Archie; same for the reworked engagement ring. Besides, the engagement ring in these two photos only has one stone, and the wedding band is missing. Has someone doctored the images?
It is going to be very interesting to see what sort of work he will be considering worthy of his high status as a prince of the United Kingdom. King Charles is surely waiting eagerly his darling boy's arrival.
What the prince of Wales thinks about this may be another matter, one would speculate.
I just saw the photo of the Turnips at the IG. She sat front and center with both her claws on the award, while Mr. Turnip was behind her with only one finger on the award. Wow.
many lottery winners do end up broke after a few years. Many lottery corporatioins have advisors to help the winners manage but it's up to the winners to make the final decisions about their winnings.
It does not take almost a year to fix some loose stones in a ring. Even if she lost the diamonds, they can be replaced. Maybe an epic fight between them is behind the missing engagement ring.
TBW showed by the way she handled Trevor's rings when she was Done with him that though she's thirsty for bling, nothing is precious to her. She looks at the cost but never the value. Here's my speculation: Harry's ring is long gone. After 'the birth of Archie' she had the ring 'upgraded' . . if replacing the original band with the skinny diamante-encrusted one that looks like she got it at Claire's can be considered an upgrade. I loathe the current fashion in those diamante bands . . they look cheap even if they aren't and too insubstantial to support a stone of any size . . and they just look young and tasteless to me, like something schoolgirls would choose for a prom. Yuck.
Changing the ring Harry gave her just a year after she received it was in my view the first stage of H.'s devaluation. What does that say, other than "Hey loser, I've had to fix the sorry-ass pathetic ring you gave me into something better." Maybe Hawwy was too high to even give AF, but if I had personally designed a ring for my bride, I'd be hurt a lot if she changed it as though she hated it from the get-go and it wasn't good enough for her.
After that, it's a short jump to dismantling the ring altogether and selling the stones off. She'd do that just to hurt him again. Maybe she claimed she 'lost' it when she's actually pocketed the cash. I certainly wouldn't put it past her. Is she still wearing the wedding band of Welsh gold presented by the Queen? That would fetch a pretty penny too, since it is so precious. * would only see the dollar signs. If selling her engagement diamonds are an FU to H, selling the Welsh gold band would be a Narc's revenge against the Queen and the whole family. We have to remember that *she values nothing* but is extremely avaricious. Maybe selling her rings is what has enabled her to pay for WME. I wouldn't doubt it.
s
Lady V also stayed that their relationship is very rocky and that H "didn't take kindly to being referred to as 'this one'".
https://youtu.be/5ANIYA2q87o?feature=shared
🎤
Apologies: Jeff Beck
Hi Ho Silver Lining
So Lo Sliver Mining
You’re everywhere and nowhere megsie
with your bits of tat
Strutting down a cobbled hillside
in your dippy hat
F-lying across the country
begging, buzzing gnat
Hoping that you’ll make a movie
babe you’re not all that
And it’s high, ho silver’s whining
away you go now megsie
Put it where the sun ain’t shining
you’re so oblivious
that it’s obvious …
Vole de mort
They’ve shat on the Queen
Prince Philip too
Followed by Charles
and the rest of the crew
They’ll carry on
never ending hullabaloo
Until haz’s stripped bare
then he might tame his shrew…
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry in 'early talks' to appear in major US reality show
So Lo Sliver Mining and Vole de mort, brilliant! You've summed her up and cut her down to size so well. She's not all that, as you said, although she thinks she's the bees knees. As for Haz taming his shrew, I think unfortunately we'll be waiting a long time, if he ever can.
I will post the link when I find it ... but she is feeding the tabloids with the story that her friends are concerned because she is so thin, and she is working so hard while her husband is a lazy lout. It is absurd. All the money they have and they have made has been through him. She may have done a dozen over-produced bad podcasts, but she only got that deal because of her husband. Same for that really bad book she published.
This refers to the Richard Eden column in the DM. A well-known heart surgeon has just published an autobiography. He praises William for having empathy, like Diana. He rolls his eyes:"But as for the other one, no comment" he says!
Not a particularly illuminating article, but the comedian does liken * to Mrs Danvers (if you don't recognise the reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mrs._Danvers).
Also, there's a weird photo which I don't recall seeing before.
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2023/10/blind-item-8_01405406949.html#disqus_thread
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 19, 2023
Blind Item #8
The property the ginger haired one wants to buy will be in his name only and considering how far away it is from where his wife lives, one can assume it is when he finally decides enough is enough.
Meghan's Mole has veen instructed to take down all her videos about and with references to moonbumps.
I thought TBW was busy busy creating a Hollywood empire. How does she find the time to scour videos and social media and put out fires?
This thread on Redditt has some wise words about this strategy: "forever batting down corks that just pop back up":
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/17c8x10/why_meghans_pr_fails/
The time and energy wasted on this fruitless activity could be used for remorse, correction and growth ...
Here's reminder of Jane's attempt to relive he childhood routine:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKqPCXLQOac
- although I can't imagine her singing about `a letter to Daddy'
For a comeback to be possible, a couple of things have to be true first:
1. You used to be a huge star, have had a lull and are now hoping to recapture former glory with new project(s). (Addendum: You must have an appealing project to promote that is going to garner this attention.
2. You have to have 'Gone Away' at some point.
********
Methinks Madam doesn't understand that a comeback cannot be possible if she's never gone away for even 15 minutes and didn't have anything of value to promote in the first place.
Okay, so she milked possibly a year of favorable press out of getting engaged/married to HazNowt. The world was rather excited for a biracial American princess joining the family . . until we got to know her a little bit. After the Wedding Freak Show (and the 'f*****ck! seen 'round the world . . such impeccably Princessy deportment from the off), she'd only been married for 3 days when she debuted her true colors (and The Claw) at Charles's garden party that she got herself and HazNowt ejected from. Based on the demure garden party ensemble . .one of the only times she EVER dressed appropriately as a Duchess, I had hopes. After all, this was a 36-year-old woman with nearly 2 decades worth of public performance experience . . whip smart, Ivy League educated and all. How little we were prepared for the real her.
Ever since, she has been plastered all over social media, magazines . .dozens of reheated dollops of invented pap about her or 'this one' every single blooming day. She's confused media notereity (for which she has paid handsomely) with real fame or achievement. What kind of media blackout obscurity is she meant to be 'coming back' from? She's been in our faces constantly for these last 4.5 years.
Hollywood is not fawning . . except for Tyler Perry evidently . .on marching orders from Big O . .? No red carpets rolled out, no huge celeb friends, no money on trees, no universal love and adulation. Too bad, so sad Mugs.
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/comedy/news/meghan-markle-rose-matafeo-royal-variety-performance-b2432943.html
Rose Matafeo has recalled her excruciating experience of meeting Meghan Markle at the Royal Variety Performance.
In 2018, fresh off her win for Best Show at the Edinburgh Comedy Awards, the New Zealand comic and Starstruck creator performed in front of the royal couple at the London Palladium.
Appearing on the Dish podcast, Matafeo told hosts Nick Grimshaw and Angela Hartnett about playing the gig in front of “a sea of white-haired people”.
“Gorgeous, gorgeous audience expecting comedy, not expecting the sort of whimsical anti-comedy of myself,” she said. “I did really bad Christmas cracker jokes, which were intentionally bad.
“Many people came up to me afterwards going, ‘Stay at it.’ ‘Keep going, girl.’ So I think the irony of it really was lost.”
Matafeo then added that Prince Harry and Markle had been in attendance. “It was Harry and Meghan as well,” she said. “She kind of glided over. It was almost like she was on a hoverboard.
“She glided over like Mrs Danvers, and she was like, ‘You must be so proud.’ And I was like, of what? Of dying on my a*** in front of f***ing royals? Yeah, I’ll be writing home about that.”
...
The article is filled with gossip about TBW, before she grabbed a prince, and when she was desperate for attention from the tabloids in the UK. It is a detailed account and shows how relentless she was in pursuit of fame.
Perhaps I am biased but I believe Ashley Cole: she was pursuing him. She probably jumped on him, as she did with Piers Morgan, when she saw he was following her (she probably checked her phone every hour).
You have to have 'Gone Away' at some point
LOL
An excellent post re *'s supposed 'comeback'. She's never been away, apart from brief periods when we did wonder where she was, perhaps in purdah after cosmetic surgery. Maybe she thinks she'll land a big role in Hollywood (only in her own mind), hence her 'comeback', although she was never a Hollywood star to begin with. She has a distorted view of reality (see below).
@Sandie
"she was in London on manoeuvres"😁. Yes, plotting, planning, scheming. As I was reading the story I thought from what I remember that it was the other way round and that * was after Ashley Cole, as the journalist states, although I'm not sure how she'd heard of him but as we know she always has her own version of the truth.
Is this why no one ever sees them?
My friend, let's call her Liz, has been complaining about the same issues to me for over 20 years. As a friend, I try to offer solutions but she never listens. The result - she is complaining about the same issues for over 20 years.
Liz is single and is looking, hard. She is popular socially, and gets invited to a lot of parties. However, she is always the guest one has to ask to leave after all the other guests have departed. At every single party.
Liz also has a very bad fashion sense. She once attended a wedding dressed in Indian tunic and trousers in a very bright pink colour which didn't flatter her at all, considering her large size at the time. She looked clownish. She is also stuck in other eras in her apparel choices - she loves bohemian clothes and Laura Ashley type dresses.
Liz complains a lot about not being the centre of attention, while hanging out with friends who spend their time at the gym and the bronzing salon. Liz doesn't believe in exercise but she does believe in a Leo's God given right to being the centre of attention.
Liz used to be a very kind hearted person but has become embittered due to life's inability to deliver on her expectations. I don't see her very often anymore.
https://www.tumblr.com/mysteriouslytransparentwitch/731779559697137664/energy-of-meghan-markle-currently-and-in-the-next?source=share&ref=justsdv
energy of meghan markle currently and in the next 3 months (10/21/2023)
current energy: it is good, peaceful. She observes the turnout of certain projects, currently, she focuses on the positive, she thinks about how to make money (maybe a child too) she works on how to get the truth about something. Things are stagnant between her and Harry.
energy in 3 months maximum End of January 2024.
then she will always be there in the same position however there will be an event which will shake up meghan in a positive way, something which will bring her abundance at the end of winter maximum in terms of temporality. There will be a lie around an emotional bond. She will regain her lion strength but she will be tied down again because of this abundance
tarot:
we start with the jack of swords, so there is an idea but seems difficult to implement. She doesn't bring in as much money as she thought.
The stage situation and the words are spread in the press. She tries to find a solution and study the situation to stabilize and move forward. But there is something that does not want to be put in place correctly or that is not deployed correctly. We look for the why.
We limit the damage. We try to clean up our past
tarot in 3 months maximum end of January 2024
there is something that is transformed in a "positive" way let me explain, she probably had a problem and she tries to get 100% but she receives 60%
it's not extraordinary but enough for stability. I still have an ace of cups (desire for a baby or a new project that is coming up)
There is a king of swords and clubs, it's the same person (I don't feel the brf) rather a man who surrounds harry and meghan.
a lot of power. it has a lot of power to isolate and mark the end or the beginning of something.
We see an end to the partnership here once again.
As I was reading the story I thought from what I remember that it was the other way round and that * was after Ashley Cole, as the journalist states, although I'm not sure how she'd heard of him...
She probably just Googled "rich British men" and then went to work.
Meryl Streep and her husband: separated for 6 years before it becomes public knowledge. Will and Jada: separated for 6 years before it becomes public knowledge. I have to admit that it is possible for the despicable duo to be separated for years, but still do public appearances together and not make any public statement. He could live in the guest house. (It would be noticed if they actually had separate homes.) But they do go on holiday together, and I think that (the idea that they are separated and living apart) is a bridge too far for me to become a believer. What do you think? Is the marriage actually over and they are putting on a public act (very little they do makes sense in any way, so there does not have to be a rational reason for pretending to still be together and 'in love').
I'm not sure Ashley Cole was that rich, relatively of course. Maybe she just found out how much football players earn and thought *'d go for one of them. In a way I'm surprised because she always went/goes for white men. Maybe Ashley Cole went after her after all. A footballer's wife was just her level, living a vacuous life in a modern mansion. When H showed interest, she must have thought she'd hit the jackpot.
William Augustus was the notorious `Butcher' of Culloden notoriety and Ernest Augustus, 5th son of Geo III, King of Hanover, Victoria's uncle, was also pretty unpleasant (suspected of murder, for instance). Was she trying to send a message to the rest of the family?
Apologies:
Rub-A-Dub-Dub*
Fallow Tallow
Rub-‘er-scrubber-grub
Manies been in her tub
Not all of them out to sea
A clutcher, a faker
body scented candle maker
Trimmed her wick
waxen effigy…
*original rhyme refers to
fairground peep show 😉
The exposure has been delayed for reasons of sensitive nature but she has very good authority to inform about the projected deadline.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/17dre3b/lady_c_and_the_reveal_of_invisible_children/
Lady C's source may be the Barkjack account, which has been hinting at this for quite a while.
I am struggling to join the dots to get to this conclusion. Why wait another 6 months? Although for Archie's birth we have no evidence that he was born of body to TBW at that hospital other than what Spare has told us, in his announcement and in the birth certificate. No one at the hospital has confirmed in any way, and there are no signatures from the birth team. Spare did not have to provide signed proof for the birth certificate ... the registrar would have believed anything he said.
The cousins also do not give anything official in the way of announcement (Mike and Zara are the most forthcoming in giving details), so this is not unusual. However, the duo cannot have it both ways ... the position and the perks they think they are entitled to, but refusing to be open and honest with the British public, who they expect to fund them nonetheless.
As for the birth of Lilli ... once again, no official confirmation in any form, but they do have footage/photographs in the mockumentary of her in the labour ward holding the newborn child. If they did use a surrogate, then they probably staged that, not so much to fool the public and royal family, but so that they could 'experience' the birth as if it was 'of body'.
Although I can see how they could have got away with hiding surrogacy and lying to everyone, I think it is probable she carried and gave birth to both children. Those two are too messy and stupid to pull off hidden surrogacies and keep the secret.
LOL! Context: South Africa won the last rugby world cup and are in the finals again for this one. They beat England in the semi-final, and this is how one little boy decided to celebrate that.
A long post about an article in the Independent that is about Eugenie promoting her podcast. She is a firm supporter of the despicable duo and admires them greatly. She not only believes that she will be made a working royal but believes she will bring her dear cousins back in the fold, officially.
Sarcasm from Richard Eden. She has stirred up a lot of hype about relaunching the Tig, but once again was refused her request to trademark the name. She has asked for another 6-month extension.
One reader’s timeline of the Turnip’s road to parenthood. I will post without comment. Only to say that I have always been on team no kids and she touches all the bases.
https://www.quora.com/Why-are-people-saying-Archie-and-Lilibet-arent-really-Harry-and-Megans-kids
I could not find the timeline following the link ... just the question and answers.
-----
I came across a comment about another 6-month delay in restarting the Tig and I think it has validity. She is not able to guarantee enough followers, and she has not been able to get the major merching deals she wants (either what she can get does not fit her image of herself, or she cannot guarantee a huge income from the deals available). Since what she really wants is adoring attention, followers are probably worth more to her than merching deals, but she may also have a problem finding a direction and cheap staff to do posting.
Why can't she just follow the requirements to trademark the name? Thismust be her third attempt.
I just find it all rather confusing. How much weed and wine are the duo consuming that they can't get some basics right?
Because they are an hireling....
(This is the first time I've found an appropriate use of the trendy plural subject and verb for a single individual.)
Hapless is in Austin Texas ... Grand Prix. Devoted dad isn't he?
As for the birth of Lilli ... once again, no official confirmation in any form, but they do have footage/photographs in the mockumentary of her in the labour ward holding the newborn child.
.........
I don't recall seeing any pix of * in the labour ward holding a newborn baby. Do you have any archive photos?
"Everything about Kate bothers Meghan. However, what I think bothers her the most is Kate’s unassailable position. Kate belongs. She has belonged in this environment since boarding school and she has steadily built her reputation and influence.
Meghan felt she could just show up and have the same level of credibility and influence and that didn’t happen. Her first events were all about establishing herself in this environment - NottCott, Skippy’s wedding, Pippa’s wedding, polo, Africa. None of them worked and she lashed out.
That’s the psychology behind the Rose Hanbury rumor."
https://www.tumblr.com/anonymoushouseplantfan/731636803771252736/do-you-think-kates-confidence-and-general-ease?source=share&ref=justsdv
And some interesting speculation from Plant:
"I think they were planning a breakup and it was serious enough that they brought in publicists to explore the possibility of separate brands.
However, the separate brands were not viable. Her popularity goes down when she’s on her own, and he doesn’t get as much coverage when he goes solo.
They’re kind of stuck now."
https://www.tumblr.com/anonymoushouseplantfan/731624982418964480/what-do-you-think-those-articles-were-about-early?source=share&ref=justsdv
@Sandie and all
Try this link. The previous one was truncated. You should see a lengthy article with pictures. This is just one Quora reader’s opinion piece, but she covers it pretty thoroughly.
The sticking point for even ‘non-birthers” like myself is the continued presence of Sussex spawn in the LOS of the Kingdom and why, if as it has been reported, that Princess Anne us on the record as saying that no one in the family has ever seen either of these children, CRIII and his late mother who was renowned for her devout Christian beliefs would allow such a monstrous fraud. Or why the Queen herself would feature a photo of dodgy provenance of herself and PP meeting “Archie” in her Christmas speech that year. What is that But the Royal imprimatur on TBW’s version of events? Yet TBW is a proven pathological liar. Anne is not. So who are we to believe?
Drums are beating more loudly over the massive conspiracy of silence surrounding these children. Even the most loyal royal list has to admit that the irregularities are confounding.
There may be large numbers of people agitating for the Sussex titles to be removed and them to be formally banished but that would be dangerous because it's handing them an even bigger stick with which to beat the Royal Family. Completely counterproductive.
I imagine that our Security Services have a very large dossier on the Harkles and their shady associates and that both ERII & CRIII were/are, and always have been, fully informed on every nasty thing she or H have ever done - who they have done it with and to whom. The incriminating stuff that there was once online may have been removed but there's no way that would have been deleted from their dossiers, although they are too stupid to realise this.
They constitute a threat to the security of the Realm so whatever is done must succeed, not go off half-cock.
My guess is that the RF could give them an ultimatum:
`Come clean about your plotting and conspiring to introduce usurpers into the Line of Succession or else you will find that all the dirt that you've been concealing will find its way into the public arena, from by so many routes that you won't be able to do anything about it. All doors will be closed to you.
`Alternatively, we could have you in the dock at the Old Bailey, charged with treason, before you know it. You needn't think that you're immune when you're in the US because we have been assured that there will be no barrier to your extradition, in case we didn't hand over anyone threatening the US.
`We've got all our ducks in a row but are prepared to allow you a few months to own up and admit everything, in order to prevent your total exposure. You will have to face consequences but they will be relatively mild compared with what awaits you otherwise.
Should you flee to a jurisdiction that has no extradition treaty with the UK, it will be taken as an admission of guilt and the world will know about you.'
This, of course, is pure speculation. If only.
The RF has allowed us to see for ourselves that funny business has been going on and trusted that it would be blindingly obvious to everyone without them having to announce it. They've shown us - for eg the footage of the Harkle's behaviour at the Investiture exhibition. Had it been out of order for it to be published, it would have been stopped.
The wording of the birth announcements, the lack of confirmatory signatures, it said everything, short of daubing graffiti on BP saying `This birth is a fraud'. We've seen it all for ourselves.
I haven't got time to go on but I don't think anyone can say it's been `covered up'. Wat was covered up was that H was an absolute POS - still, would you announce to the World that your son/grandson was a despicable apology for a human being?
Photo of newborn Lilli. I remember seeing the full photo in the Netflix documentary. Besides, that is Meghan's hand. She is lying on a raised hospital bed and Lilli is on her tummy.
Thanks for the new Quora link. It works perfectly. As I am scanning through, I am noticing numerous items given as fact but they are not.
Portland never denied, or confirmed, that Archie was born there. DM published an article naming the gynaecologist TBW used. Her husband supposedly denied this on social media (that she was the doctor who delivered Archie). But, since the duo never actually named their doctor or anyone on the birth team, we cannot know who the doctor was. DM were speculating in naming the doctor. Most of the rest of point (a) about the birth of Archie is spot on in listing some oddities, in addition to outright lies. However, I don't think hapless said he ate the Nandos after the birth, but while he was waiting for the birth, and he did not say that she ate any of it. I think she said she had the epidural after bouncing on the ball and being in the pool. It is difficult to make sense of their accounts as they are so full of fantasy. Why bounce on a ball? Was she taken to hospital to induce labour but then refused the induction in an effort to get natural labour started? She also abandoned the birthing pool and then had an epidural. From their account, I guessed that when confronted with labour pains, brought on quickly by induction, she abandoned all plans for a 'natural' birth and asked for the epidural.
The post is peppered with some very fuzzy thinking.
It is quite common for the gynaecologist to not actually deliver the baby (that is done by a midwife), and it is common for the gynaecologist to acknowledge the team.
The late Queen and Prince Phillip were not posing for an official photo shoot. They were cornered in a corridor by the duo and Doria. That photo could even have been taken without their permission as both were looking at the baby and not at the person taking the photo. Phillip died a couple months after he left hospital that last time, and his death was 11 months after the birth of Archie., so that part of the post is complete nonsense.
To say that the christening photo is fake is ridiculous. And that is not a photo from Lilli's christening. In the absence of real photos, sugars make up photos as done kind of fantasy. That is obviously what that photo is. The Quora post unravels from there with so much fiction and nonsense that it rivals the stories from the duo.
The glaring oddities I can find are the birth weight of Archie who was supposedly at least 10 days overdue. He was a small baby. I also find it odd that they managed to get to the hospital and back, with their security entourage, without being seen by the media. Everyone was on birth watch and everyone has a cellphone ... No one has explained why their staff released a statement saying she had been taken to hospital in labour hours after they had returned home. Why not simply say they were back home again? Their claims about why they did not have any kind of photo call after the birth changed and ended up being complete nonsense. First they made up the nonsense about a non-existent emergency department, and then she whined that she was never asked to do a photo call. How could the media gather for a photo call if no one knew where she was or when she gave birth? By this stage they had decided to bolt and were taking secret footage and keeping it for when they could sell it, which they did with the Netflix documentary.
Thanks for the link to the photos of a newborn Lili in hospital. The photos, in my mind, do not prove anything. It's a very sweet baby but frankly, could be anybody.
I too thought the Portland neither denied not confirmed* gave birth there. I thought paps/journalists were lying in wait near the hospital, yet no one saw anything.
Getting something from Nando's when you're in labour? Not what they taught us during antenatal classes. As for an epidural, I had one with my second child and there was no way I could have gone anywhere two hours after the birth.
No, too many things that don't add up. I could go on. As for Archie's pregnancy (we never really saw * pregnant with Lili), where do we start?
This is a different photo but still claiming `new born'
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/533324780842025391/
Frankly, I'd have to see a film of the child with intact umbilical cord emerging from a body which is indubitably *'s to believe this is Lil'Betty (as called by some Sinners) born of her body. Or else a declaration by trusted witnesses. Strange, that omission...?
But didn't H say he and she were both there?
The constantly changing stories point to a lack of truth.
A surrogate child, or borrowed baby?
-----
The `laughing gas business' (as in the theatrical sense of `business') features in `Only Fools and Horses' - video here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRpymv0rHH0
-first broadcast 1991
Curiously enough, the show's title comes from the saying that Del Boy's mantra - `only fools and horses work.' It'd be a good signature tune for the Harkles.
Understatement is the royal family’s MO. After all, this is a family accustomed to Not Explaining themselves. What tidbits they do that out are well-curated and ever only as much as they feel like revealing.
The first Sussex pregnancy and birth tableaux were from soup to nuts, completely bizarre and contrary to every other Royal birth since the warming pan incident. Insiders would have been well aware that something was very rotten in Windsor viz. this baby, but as far as the larger world was concerned, the official Palace line was that everything about Harry’s firstborn was completely normal.
Everyone in the RF has been trained from birth to Keep Calm and Carry On, and that’s what they did for public consumption though behind the scenes I think it was crisis management mode. The children of Harry appear to be firmly in the line of succession and have been granted the style of Prince and Princess. Archie even has his father subsidiary title of Earl Dumbarton. This is quite an achievement for two children for witch no witnesses to their births can be identified, and according to the Princess Royal, no Royal family members have clapped eyes on either tyke. The sets up a direct contradiction to the presentation and christening pictures of Archie… Both widely disseminated, and the former featured by the Queen in her Christmas speech of 2019. Where Lily is concerned, I’m sure the Palace is relieved that anything to do with Mugs’ second figment baby was not their purview at all. Since the Doctor Who allegedly attended to TBW’s prenatal care in Cali Shuttered her practice And fled the state in the dead of night, leaving all her other patients in the lurch, we can’t get the scoop directly from her.
At least from here, on this point it seems like Harry’s wife has won. She’s got her a little American prince and princess, at least on paper, and at least on paper they are legitimate heirs to the throne of Harry’s father. Two unchallenged lies that remain unchallenged in perpetuity are as good as the truth for daily use.
You and I will have to continue to disagree about the legitimacy of Harry’s wife’s natural motherhood. You are far more willing than I to give her the benefit of the doubt, but I am not able to give credence to a single thing the woman says. I think there is an overwhelming preponderance of evidence, or perhaps I should rather say a preponderance of the absence of evidence is we would expect to see if this were a natural birth which had progressed according to all the protocols observed by other Royal mothers… That Harry’s wife did not actually birth Archie. Even his name sounds like one of their inside jokes cooked up while toking on a Doobie at Soho House. Archie isn’t a child do much as a brand, in my opinion. Too many weirdnesses surrounding this child and how he came into the world. You enumerate several of them yourself in your second paragraph to me above. This tells me that you seem to have some doubts yourself about the veracity of this birthing story. So why is it a ridiculous notion that Harry’s wife may have tampered/staged a christening photo at Windsor Castle? You provide plenty of evidence yourself that her story about the birth doesn’t hold water so why would she be pristinely truthful about these pictures? I did say that that court piece was only an opinion of a blogger such as we write here And not any sort of hard journalism. You are correct when you say the Portland never denied that the duchess was a patient there, nor did they confirm it since they are bound by confidentiality. I think it has been confirmed however that there were no specialist teams on the roster that day in the ob/gyn department and I also thought I remembered reading there were no births at the Portland on 6 May. The hospital would be allowed to release such general statistics as these since they do not apply to any certain individuals
Patients.
We simply have no proof other than Harry’s wife’s word about the legitimacy of any pictorial proofs or details of her hospital stay etc. A number of people for a better verse than I in digital manipulation of images have rung into say that the anomalies in both photos of Archie with royal family members Are extreme. If memory serves, Catherine was observed coming to Windsor in a blue dress. Suitable for a summer day in July. Why then in the christening photo allegedly taken the same afternoon is she wearing a crushed raspberry velvet dress and headband that she wore to the Queen‘s Christmas lunch the previous December? Why is Lady Jane Fellowes dressed In an ensemble or suitable for a day at the races than an ecclesiastical ceremony in church? There are many other details wrong in that photo having to do with proportions, distortions, nonexistent site lines to camera etc. that have been exhaustively detailed elsewhere. The point I’m making is that Harry’s wife lies for sport. A doctored picture is nothing to her. According to Archbishop Welby’s diary Not to mention hundreds of witnesses, on this particular Saturday in July, he was presiding over at synodical conference in York—300 miles away. No one at the conference mentioned the Archbishop hopping on a chopper and disappearing from the podium for a few hours so he could go baptize Meghan’s baby and pop back up to York. Surely he would’ve assigned the dean of the chapel in Windsor to perform this rite As he himself was otherwise engaged in a very high profile responsibility. But Harry’s wife insists that the Archbishop baptized Archie.
I agree that action should have been taken much earlier on and that afternoon at the polo field, in 2019, would have been a good time.
There are two possible reasons which immediately come to mind as to why nothing happened. The first is regarding community relations in the UK. This is a very sensitive area, for all that the `black British' population is a very small part of the total population of England and Wales the figure from the 2021 census is c4%, well below the US equivalent of 12-14%.
(I imagine the figure's even lower in Scotland).
Remember, * had made that very peculiar comment about there not being `enough' blacks in the the UK - `Enough for what?', one might ask. That may have rung alarm bells. Also, we don't know how much she was playing the R-card within the family, even before April '21 and the interview with Oprah.
The second factor is ERII herself, the then captain of the national ship. I recall that even during the War of the Waleses, she was accused of being a head-in-the-sand ostrich. It was surely made worse here by her view of pregnancy - I've seen it reported that she could hardly bring herself to say the word, a hangover from Victorian times - OK for a mare to be in foal but for a woman to be seen swelling, well, it meant that everyone knew what she'd been doing.
Also, it's difficult enough for us ordinary folk to accept what narcs do to us, before we acknowledge what vile characters they are, so it must have been far more so for her. Whatever Charles or William thought, they could do nothing while the Queen was alive.
Since then, the press and many of the public have worked hard to demonstrate that Diana was right, that Charles was weak and indecisive. I don't believe he is, nor has rushed to judgement. He takes his time and sticks to his decisions. Paradoxically, I found there can be strength in doing nothing aka biding my time, when dealing with a major narc
I can see how it would have been difficult for the Palace to intervene officially in the Sussex Pregnancy Show while it was in progress. A new Duchess says she’s pregnant, there’s no reason to doubt her…at first. After all, hasn’t Harry always wanted kids? How delightful we’re thrilled… After sandbagging everyone at Eugenie’s wedding, she’s immediately off on the Australian tour the next day… No time for a debrief, And it’s not like the Queen was going to demand to see the ultrasounds. Moonbump got a lot of airtime Down Under but at least She wasn’t outlandish with them at first. The bump looked realistic enough for the first trimester. So now the palace in a bit of a bind because even if there are the seeds of doubt, the international press is celebrating The joyous expectation of Harry’s impending paternity. Even I thought she might be legit this early on, even though she looked about five months along at least in the blue dress in Fiji. Other times she looked as svelte as ever, in white no less. But I wasn’t sure if she was faking until early December and the debut of Square Pillow Bump. Whatever the Queen chose to know or not know about the situation, I find it hard to fathom that the security services wouldn’t have known if the Duchess had brokered a surrogacy agreement abroad. It seems that both Five and Six Would have been working together if TBW arranged this in North America. Surely Harry’s shambolic piece Who spent most of her brief sojourn as a working royal visibly drunk or high and unkempt on engagement could not outfox her Majesty’s spies. I just can’t believe that there was no clue behind palace walls what Harry’s wife was plotting. If they sat on their hands waiting to see how far she would take this, that was a miscalculation because she has gone into her own orbit altogether.
I think Charles always has been and continues to be underestimated. He is tougher than he is given credit for. In his first address as King, Charles did not mess around—he swiftly elevated his heir to Prince of Wales and told his Spare to get on his bike and keep pedaling with “…Overseas”. That is rather a quaint term from a bygone era when Someone in another country was really far away, too far to perhaps see again. With our interconnected world of video link conferencing and private jets on demand, nowhere is truly far away anymore. But with this one word overseas, CRIII Made it clear that his second son no longer has anything to do with Us. Regrettable, but his choice. People that still think he’s dithering do not understand Scorpios. Once wounded, they do not forget… Or forgive, particularly. And Hazmat has issued many wounds. He’s done. What is done about “the children” remains to be seen.
FWIW, I agree re KCIII. I've always thought that he was stronger than he was popularly perceived as being. I look at his successes in organic, sustainable farming, and teaching traditional skills during a time when he was derided and ridiculed for such a thing! A weak person would have bowed to popular to popular opinion. He is a person with an inner locus of control. Look at how people ridiculed his choice of Camilla over Diana. Shallow people are fixated on appearance. It is impossible to live peacefully with crazy.
HG Tudor has a nice one about the baby bump(s). Comments are good too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ul3Xg10V-5o&t=3s
I have not yet watched his one on the hidden kids.
Thank you for the HG Tudor video, it is a very amusing one and the circus music adds to the fun. He has a go at Hello! magazine which promotes all photos of *, particularly the pregnancy ones. As he puts it, it "just shows the utter shite that is concocted here and the desperation so events from over 5 years" 😂
Interesting posts at above ...
TBW has had publicity deals set up by WME. I am not sure about this: the clothes she has been wearing for appearances are from last season or earlier; WME is not a publicity agent. But perhaps WME can't get her deals until they can improve her image, so they are using magazines like Vogue, etc. to do so. If Vogue can make her a 'style icon', then WME can get her the kind of deals she wants (model for Givenchy and so on). But are Givenchy fooled by the narrative that wearing an outfit results in immediate sales of all stock, when she is actually wearing something from a previous season being sold online, probably on sale? She can effectively help a brand get rid of old stock? Is that the angle? Do WME and her get a cut of the sales of the old stock?
So that's why her blog The Tig is not up and running; no quality brands want Mugsy to represent their merchandise.
Mugsy's going to have to aim lower...WalMart, Kohl's. No, not Kohl's, they have the Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen line, Elizabeth and James. What's lower than WalMart? Pamida?
I am of the same mind in terms of the conclusions in the entire post. She is the typical example of a person who has climbed the ladder to a position way beyond her talents and capabilities. She wants Givenchy, but in reality her style and influence, and everything else, is actually aligned with a brand 'lower than Walmart'. If she lived realistically within her means I reckon she could get enough such deals to live comfortably. The sort of 'brands' who would want her would be those who just want to be noticed and those who are tone deaf to public opinion (remember what happened to Bud Light?). She could certainly do better merching low-end brands on IG than I could!
The Duchess should just admit where her only talents lie and open an Only Fans account. Who’s to say she doesn’t have one already? Getting papped wearing that ratty Panama hat only takes one so far.
The 91-year-old was one of Queen Elizabeth II's six maids of honour at the late monarch's 1953 Coronation.
Her royal connections do not end there - as well as enjoying a childhood friendship with the late queen, she was lady-in-waiting to the monarch's sister Princess Margaret.
She said the Duchess of Sussex thought she would be 'riding around in a golden coach' after her marriage to Prince Harry and did not know what duties were expected of her.
The British socialite added that she feels 'very sorry' for her husband, and said this opinion is also felt in America.
Speaking on the Rosebud with Gyles Brandreth podcast, Lady Glenconner said: 'I think the thing about Meghan was, she had no idea what was expected of her really.
'I think she just thought it was sort of like being another actress, you know.
'Riding around in a golden coach and everything like that.
'And actually, being a member of the Royal Family - a lot of it is extremely boring.'
Lady Glenconner said members of the Royal Family are expected to meet thousands of people and to say something interesting and nice to each person.
Discussing the King's Coronation, Lady Glenconner said she sat next to American politician John Kerry, 79.
The socialite, born Anne Tennant, said she asked him: 'What do you think in America about Harry and Meghan?'.
She continued: 'He said "We all feel very, very sorry for Harry. I think I can just leave it at that."'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-12661787/Queen-Elizabeths-childhood-friend-Lady-Glenconner-hits-Meghan-Markle-saying-Duchess-thought-royal-life-like-film-star.html
My pity for Harry died forever the day he chose pimping his wife to Bob Iger on a urine-colored carpet to discharging his duty as Captain General Royal Marines toward fallen warriors of his own. There is nothing he can do to redeem himself in my eyes after that. A heartfelt apology an admission that he screwed up would’ve been welcomed by his Marines But it’s too late now. In his puny little mind, Harry doesn’t believe he did anything wrong in prioritizing “The Brand” over duty. He never will. That’s why he’s a lost cause.
I feel sorry that all the promise of the ginger-haired toddler in Diana’s arms was not to be and he turned out to be a worthless cruel clueless man. Terribly sorry about that.
Mugsy could also represent a line of calligraphy pens and paper, and all the accoutrements. She's got some talent with fancy writing, I'll give her that.
Besides, he is much too cheap to buy property in the UK and his wife would never let go of funds for such a purchase (yes, I do believe that she controls the purse strings).
Lady C says her source says there is no truth at all to the rumours about returning to the UK and buying there.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/17f5npf/lady_c_tea_youtube_102123_a_few_nuggets/
The entire post at Reddit is worth reading.
-----
@Hikari
I agree that hapless has shown himself to be a spiteful, nasty piece of work, and that there is no hope of positive change at all. TBW simply removed the facade that his royal position gave him and revealed him for what he really is. Redemption is for people who messed up, sometimes very badly, and feel remorse and work on earning forgiveness. He is not such a person.
A: Yes you are. I have it on very good authority that the launch of that particular missile has been delayed for various reasons to Spring of next year. None of the reasons for this delay would be advisable for me to get into. But hopefully no more delays past next spring.
-----
The above is from the same Reddit post about Lady C. I may be wrong, but I believe that her source is the BarkJack X account, because they have posted this exact information and given the exact same timeline. I suppose Lady C maintains her following by projecting the image that she has sources in or close to the royal family, which is why she is not honest about her source (give the source, the information, and then your opinion would be the right thing to do, but people have seemed to abandon 'traditional' research rules).
Seth MacFarlane pokes fun at the duo, revealing that most people see through their BS and see them for what they really are. It is a savage takedown, and the bruised egos in Montecito will be monumental. They usually do something spiteful or make some kind of 'blissfully happy and successful couple' display to make themselves feel better, so watch this space!
I don't know if Lady C "has sources in or close to the royal family" but if she does, then she absolutely cannot name her sources or else people will stop talking to her. It wouldn't be fair in any case. She does mix with the upper echelons of society and maybe hears some snippets here and there.
Glad to see Family Guy taking it to the grifters. This is all beginning to feel like the longest story ever told.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/17flg7o/lady_c_tea_youtube_102423_a_few_nuggets/
Back story: When she was writing her book, someone associated with TBW approached her with 'information' that Thomas had abused his youngest daughter in the most vile way.
"While Prince Harry and Meghan have a deal with Netflix, where they've produced several shows from the docu-series Harry and Meghan to the behind-the-scenes look at the Invictus Games with Heart of Invictus, there's an obvious hole in the second joke about Instagram: the couple doesn't currently have a public social media presence."
https://archive.ph/2023.10.24-170801/https://people.com/family-guy-mocks-meghan-markle-prince-harry-what-joke-got-wrong-instagram-8379417
-----
Meghan Markle is trying to repair her image but she's "burned so many bridges" and "nobody is that interested unless she comes with Prince Harry," an insider has claimed.
The Duchess of Sussex secured a contract with talent agency William Morris Endeavor (WME), which counts some very big names as its clients, but after six months there are no projects on the horizon and the couple's reputation is still in tatters.
Now it's been revealed there's been a dispute over what direction Meghan should take, according to a source.
They told OK!: "Meghan is signed to WME, Harry isn’t. They are dealing with the couple’s image, but Meghan is their only client."
But the source argued that, even though the agency wants to push Meghan forward in her own light, "it's clear that she’s only got to where she is today because of her association with Harry and the Royal Family."
They went on to say that "it would seem nobody is that interested in Meghan unless she comes with Harry.
"The Royal Family is the reason why she’s so well known. That’s why it came as a big surprise to everyone that she burned so many bridges."
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1827223/royal-family-live-meghan-markle-princess-kate
It is being put in the category as targetted harrassment and bullying.
This is forking unbelievable how can 2 proven liars, frauds
have so much pull.
https://twitter.com/Maryann49479023/status/1716933882728370359
Catherine and William named best dressed couple in the world.
* and Hairball come in at #5!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
We can assume the above statement came from the top dogs at WME.
And all this time we thought Hawwy was the dimwit.
The real dimwit is Mrs. Hawwy.
The Duchess of Sussex secured a contract with talent agency William Morris Endeavor (WME).
There's the rub. What talent? WME might have some big names as its clients but just because * pays them doesn't mean they can magically make her talented. I wonder how much longer they'll keep her on their books, however skilled they might be.
An 'insider' claims that the jaunt in Canouan was to try and reignite the spark in their relationship, avoid couples' therapy, and plot a way forward. Hmm ...!
-----
As I understand the snippet, there is a hearing scheduled for argument on Madame's motion to dismiss Samantha's amended complaint on Nov 8. Madame wants the argument conducted over zoom so her lawyers don't have to schlep to Florida. The Judge apparently denied that motion and the lawyers must show up in person. That does not mean Madame herself needs to show, her appearance is optional. So is Sam's.
Edit: Looks like this was a Joint motion to appear on zoom. Both sides wanted zoom, but the Court said no.
Edit 2: This means Ellie Hall won't be able to live tweet the hearing like last time, unless SHE schleps to Florida too.
Edit 3: Ellie Hall formerly of Buzzfeed News and seriously biased "reporter" tweeted this 7 hours ago: Anyways, a lot of the coverage of Markle v. Markle has been, uh, not great so @ editors with freelance budgets, please note that I am available to cover the latest updates in the trial. Of course you are Ellie. Has Madame already placed her order?
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/17ftqxo/samantha_markle_lawsuit/
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-12669831/Kelly-Rowland-appears-forget-meeting-Meghan-Markle-2014-claims-Beyonc-concert-LA-summer-time-crossed-paths-warm-Duchess.html
Sources cited in this article say that TBW is desperate to get a role in Costner's Western Horizon as she thinks this will make her a Hollywood star. I believe this. The articles says Costner is considering using her to 'bring attention' to the project. This I do not believe. Costner has the kind of career and status and proven talent that means he does not need a talentless grifter to bring attention to his project. She is delusional; Costner is not.
KEUD2t4C_x96.jpg
Del Taco Restaurants
@DelTaco
Harry & Meghan we are still waiting for your post to go up today plz
1:22 PM · Oct 24, 2023
·
48.2K Views
I trust all Nutties are familiar with the Family Guy bit to which Del Taco refers.
I'm wondering what significance attaches to the vague 'next spring' projected date for these revelations, unless CRIII wants to mark the first anniversary of his Coronation before things get messier.
that's so funny
I just finished a smashing book right now about Charles and Diana written by a royal housekeeper*, and the book makes clear that Charles never ever could be dissuaded from achieving anything selfish that he wanted, and trained his staff through anger, entitlement, and persistence to do his bidding even when underhanded strings had to be pulled.
I thus wonder if Charles is smoothing the path of his “darling boy” by pressuring HP or whoever wields the power to sign off on new rules to proclaim that henceforth adoptees and children-through-surrogacy are legitimately in line of succession rather than not-eligible. The current rules state that children in the line of succession must be ‘born of the body’.
I fear that any reveal will take place after the rules have changed so the kids will stay in the succession, and then the news will speak understandingly and tenderly about H’s shame at being unable to produce children, and Meghan’s sorrow at not being able to carry a child for her beloved H, so in their mutual pain and shame and sorrow they got children however they could, not realizing until too late that people misunderstood them, and their deceit was due to their great love for QEII who secretly instructed them to do this, and it was their supreme love for her as their sovereign and granny that led them to this deceit. Etc…etc…etc… They are proven liars so they could jump into this story line feet first, and with no shame.
If there was nothing hinky about the birth of those two children, the matter wouldn’t even be up for discussion. Doctors would have signed off on being there for their birth. But instead we have the constant go-round and mystery, and no-one will admit to having assisted or witnessed the birth of those kids via the body of Meghan Markle. That leaves the populace to suspect that the two children were NOT born of her body, and thus cannot legitimately be on the succession list.
I am irked that Charles has not had his innumerable staff update the royal website. Even Lady C makes clear that the royal website continues to give patently inaccurate information. It still claims that Montecito twosome continue to support and uphold the royal blah blah blah. H is still 5th in line to the throne, and the (his sperm? Her eggs? Dunno, maybe one or the other, but doubt both) two kids are 6th and 7th in line.
The fact that Charles seemingly refuses to cut those two down to size, or alternatively prove birth-by-body in order to stop all the outrageous kerfuffle once and for all, is why I fear he will play a blinder on all of us in favor of his ‘dear boy’ and his boy’s bike. As we know from SPARE, bikes are a very sensitive topic to the dear boy. How appropriate that ‘dear boy’ gets to ride his own bike. If any Nutties here don’t understand the word bike, look it up in a slang dictionary.
I don’t know why Charles continues to stall, or specifically refuse, to put the lying grifters in their place. Occam’s Razor: he doesn’t want them put in their place. He wants them placated, and stalls stalls stalls until the line of succession rules can be changed in order to calm the two grifters. Why? I suspect because they have dirt which, if revealed, will bring down the monarchy. Thus, keep H & M happy, and keep them quiet, no matter at what cost. Stall until the problem becomes William’s to handle.
————-
*non fiction book entitled “The Housekeeper’s Diary: Charles and Diana Before the Breakup” by Wendy Berry published in 1995. Banned in Britain. Mrs Berry worked as their housekeeper at Highgrove 1985-1992. I read the free online version on archive.org which was entitled “Print^sessa Diana”
Guest Speaker (who some think is TBW) having a meltdown rant. What really amuses me is that someone is nitpicking over just about every grammar mistake that Guest Speaker makes (that is all). Guest Speaker loves to get in an argument defending her beloved, and here is this person simply pointing out grammatical errors. Guest Speaker ignores this, but her rant ramps up. TBW posting comments while on her second bottle of wine?
This is explosive ... Byline Times is throwing a whole lot of mud at Dan Wootton, the royal family and top royal aides. The article was posted as an image so I cannot reproduce it here
I do not believe any of this smear. But will the duo be able to resist another victimhood interview? Do you think that this time someone will sue? There are so many errors in the article and Charles and William are the two being targeted. Maybe I am a drama junkie, but I do so want someone to sue them!
“The only way these two could eclipse King Charles is if it was a competition to determine who was the most deluded! First and second place go to Megsy baby. Haznobrain, ever the intellectual disappointment, manages to come in third.”
Haha! So true.
I came across this Behaviour Panel analysis of the duo from the Netflixdocumentaty that I had not seen before. I have just started watching and right off realized that, fatal character flaws aside, the duo leapt into everything thoughtlessly and with no preparation. He had staff who would have given her guidance, she was given a thick dossier (how to dress, protocol ... everything) ... so why was she so ill-prepared and chaotic? She was buying jewellery online, a lot, before they were even married, is revealed in the Netflix documentary. She still does. I venture that the habit is an addiction. I think I have shared before that I went through a brief stage (much younger than now) when I loved browsing gorgeous gift shops around where I lived (fabric, jewellery, clothes, prints ...) and I always had to wear two or three necklaces, three or four rings, three earrings (I have double piercing in ine ear) at the same time ... I even was given a huge jewellery-making kit as a gift and used to make my own jewellery. I did grow out of this 'phase', which lasted a few years! TBW does not seem to be outgrowing her excessive purchasing of itty bitty jewellery online and, at least sometimes, wearing an excessive amount at the same time.
You can find the RadarOnline article about Costner at the above link.
-----
There is also a lot of speculation that they stopped in Atlanta on their way back from their island off-season jaunt so that she could badger Tyler Perry for a role in one of his upcoming movies (big Netflix deal for about 6 movies). I think they persuaded Perry to let them use his plane to get to New York and then the island but he did not make it available to get them back to LA so they had to switch planes.
Kate, 41, has previously taken on the role of a mediator within the Royal Family, notably bringing her husband Prince William, 41, and Prince Harry, 39, together after Prince Phillip's funeral in 2021.
However, it appears the current situation is proving to be more complex following a string of 'brutal' personal attacks unleashed by Harry in his memoir Spare.
Royal commentator Jennie Bond told Fabulous: 'Catherine has played the peacemaker in the past and has brought William and Harry together, and I think that comes from her own family, and their values.
'But I think she has got to a stage whereby she has had to take a step back. Things have gone too far, and she feels upset and, quite frankly, hurt and insulted.'
...
...Kate was upset by Harry saying Meghan found Kate and her husband a bit 'cold' when they first met.
...
In any case I don't think the Harkles were invited to Sandringham and this wouldn't be *'s idea of Christmas.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-12666719/amp/kate-olive-branch-prince-harry-Christmas-expert-royal-family.html
Sorry to preach, but I am so shocked and feel such horror at the idea of those people trapped and being slaughtered. Too much violence in this world, and violence begets violence and damages psyches.
https://archive.ph/2023.10.26-140033/https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12673071/Harry-Meghan-Family-Guy-grifters-proof-descent-cultural-trash-America-irritation-KARA-KENNEDY.html
It’s happened faster than many of us perhaps thought.
At the start of the year, Harry and Meghan were on everyone’s lips.
Thanks to the double-barrel onslaught of their Netflix documentary whine-a-thon and Harry’s misery memoir Spare, people simply couldn’t get enough.
Love them or loathe them, they were the conversation.
Yet in less than ten months, it seems their inevitable implosion in relevance, their downward spiral towards the cultural trash can, is all but complete.
And how sad.
A pair whose refreshing presence once said so much, who – as the 21st Century royal couple – offered a bright, modern future of influence (in the truest sense), reduced to the butt of a throwaway gag on a comedy cartoon series way past its prime.
Gone are the days of full-episode South Park takedowns. On Sunday, Family Guy – limping on in its 22nd series – featured a twenty-second satire of the pair.
Cont.
‘Put it with the rest of them,’ Harry says, waving the butler away.
Meghan, lounging in her bikini, gets an alert on her iPhone: ‘Baaabe, time to do our daily $250,000 sponsored Instagram post… for Del Taco.’
‘I shouldn’t have left the made-up nonsense,’ Harry drones.
No, he shouldn’t. Because look where it’s got him.
The worst thing about the scene is that it’s excruciatingly unfunny.
The unfairly gained Montecito millions, the moody prince, his fame-obsessed actress-wife. It’s all pretty obvious stuff – and tells you a lot about the quality of the writer’s room on a show that’s been running since 1999.
No subtlety, no comic timing, just one smack-you-in-the-face obvious ‘punchline’: America thinks you, Harry and Meghan, are grifters!
Back in June, when Meghan’s Spotify show Archetypes was axed after one underwhelming series, American sports supremo and Spotify’s own ‘head of podcast innovation and monetization’ Bill Simmons explosively lambasted the pair as ‘f***ing grifters’.
It was rude, perhaps uncalled for, and no doubt deliberately provocative.
It could also have been dismissed as the outburst of one angry old man.
This latest Family Guy clip changes things. It tells us that Americans everywhere now agree with Simmons. They’ve lost the culture.
But it didn’t have to be this way.
While Britain washed its hands of the boresome pair, excitement in America was palpable at the prospect of gaining a slice of Royalty stateside.
Hollywood was practically polishing the Walk of Fame stars ahead of time.
Cont.
This is a nation of hard workers. And when it became clear that Harry and Meghan wanted it all – to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars – without doing, well, very much at all, Americans woke up from the runaway-Royal daze.
How could they not? Even the most patient will admit that the moaning, the woe-is-me-ing, the Mandela cosplaying all became way too much.
There was Oprah, The Cut, Netflix, Spare, tell-all after tell-all interview amid bouclé couches and $1,800 Hermes blankets, hashing and rehashing the same tall tale of grievance.
Hollywood sure loves a sob story... until it doesn't.
Whatever you think of them, America’s true cast of A-Listers – the Gwyneths, the J-Los, the Beyoncés – work bloody hard to maintain their influence and wealth, often over decades-long careers.
A lot of graft goes into the constant flurry of exciting brand evolutions, new album announcements, vaginal jade-eggs releases.
Paltrow co-owns California’s biggest cannabis company and she never even talks about it.
So what certainly doesn’t fly is calling up a few famous gal pals to whinge with lazy self-entitlement on hour-long podcasts about your unmatched struggles, globetrotting like a gap-year teen on pointless preening ‘tours’ (see Harry in Japan), spewing word-guff at meaningless ceremonies (see Meghan’s Women of Vision Award), while still expecting the butler to deliver the check on the golden tray.
Of course, there has been much chatter of a coming Sussex reinvention.
In April, Meghan signed on with Hollywood Rottweiler Ari Emanuel’s talent agency WME. And we've heard countless rumors about a revival of ‘The Tig’, a much-touted return to Instagram, even a separation of Brands Sussex (Meghan bolstering her celebrity, Harry prioritizing philanthropy and other noble causes).
But we’re still waiting.
Cont.
September’s Invictus Games came and went with one brief frenzy over Meghan’s J Crew sweater. A World Mental Health Day event in New York earlier this month probably happened – but who knows or cares?
Harry and Meghan fled Britain for America to escape their gilded life of privilege and unearned influence.
Perhaps the sunny hills of Montecito will now become an even worse palace-prison, one where their assets and friends surely dwindle, their familial ties become ever-more strained, and the chance of reconciliation sinks further away.
End
After reading the stupendously eye-opening book on Charles and Diana, I keep getting glimpses of an unfair future in which Charles has pulled strings so that the two Naugahyde vinyl royals can stay, once and for all, 6th and 7th in line for throne:
“His MO seems to be more about burying information until the interest goes away or setting up someone like his valet to take the heat.” Yes, that tracks, and you’ve made me feel more at ease.
KARA KENNEDY: Harry and Meghan's twenty excruciating seconds on Family Guy are proof of their descent into the cultural trash can - and America's irritation at their lazy self-entitlement
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12673071/Harry-Meghan-Family-Guy-grifters-proof-descent-cultural-trash-America-irritation-KARA-KENNEDY.html
In regards to "The Housekeeper's Diary" by Wendy Berry, I have read that book. I remember being quite aghast that such a core member of Royal staff would have been so indiscreet. Ms. Berry must have had quite a bone to pick with the RF. My chief memory of that book is of Diana's bulumic bathroom habits, which Ms. Berry would have been privy to since she was in charge of Diana's suite. And of the dirty afternoons Chas and Cam had while Diana was out. They seemed to enjoy the thrill of nearly getting caught. Definitely not a shining period in Charles's life, I concede.
But, perhaps naively but still, I am willing to give him some credit for personal growth since then. Ms. Berry covered the period when the Wales marriage was at its nadir, and when her book came out in 1995, the couple wasn't officially divorced yet. This was the worst time, PR-wise for Charles. The War of the Waleses was in full swing and both halves of the couple were taking chunks out of each other via their media handlers. I was no fan of Charles at that time. In the years since Diana died, a fuller version of the story has emerged which doesn't exonerate Charles and Camilla by any means but makes a little more compassion possible for the strain Diana's emotional problems put upon the entire family, not just herself. I'm not the same person I was nearly 30 years ago . . older and wiser, me. Some of the wisdom I've gained I'd just as soon not have but it's mine now. Charles has hopefully also grown up in the intervening years. The fallout from his conduct during his first marriage is still raining down, chiefly in the personage of Haitch Turnip, his secondborn.
I'm not as convinced as you are that KCIII is determined to revamp the rules of succession in Turnip's favor and welcome him back to Blighty with open paternal arms. Since his first address upon his ascession last September, in my view, he has given zero evidences of any such intention. He relegated Hazmat to "overseas"; evicted him from Frogmore Cottage; as good as replaced him as Counsellor of State; requires H to give a 30-day notice of any proposed visit to any Royal property same as any of the peasantry; has upheld his late mother's stripping of militry honors and Royal patronages from H, and does not receive any communications from his renegade brat on any platform personally. Equerries handle all. If KCIII allows open invitations to Balmoral to stand, it's no doubt with the knowledge that Turnip would never accept. Apart from his literal fly-by on the day the Queen died, Hazmat hadn't set foot in Scotland since at least 2017.
The inaccuracies on the Royal website viz. the LOS and the Turnips' current roles and 'service to the monarch' are maddening for sure, and quizzical. After all, the Turnips have now been in North America for 4 years; more than twice the length of time they were 'working Royals'. They'd run off (or been run off) a scant 18 months after the wedding. A terrible showing. Thomas Markle, Jr. had prepared everyone that his sister would blow everything up, but that was some fast work . . not even two years. Mugsy is really a cut-rate Narc because a top grade one would still be ensconced in a palace and everyone would be eating out of her hand.
If Arch and LilBetty are children of surrogacy and the end goal was always to get them accepted as legitimate heirs to the succession, that could have become the Sussex platform and would've had a greater chance of succeeding if H and M had stayed on-side and worked the system from within. Infertility is a reality for a lot of women, and alternative means of having families should be able to be talked about without shame and secrecy. But--when the fate of a 1000-year-old *hereditary* monarchy is at the center . . Blood is everything. Otherwise, what claim does this family have to rule any longer, if any common-born married-ins (an American, yet) can special-order children of unknown provenance and insert them into the hereditary monarchy of the United Kingdom? If those children cannot be proven to be Royal through Harry and from his legitimate wife . . well, literally any person on the street could come forward with a claim of being Royal. Might as well kick William out of his position and make deluded Aussie man Simon Durante-Day, who is convinced without any medical proofs that he is the love child of teenage Charles and Camilla, the Prince of Wales. Mr. Day says that is his birthright. Frankly we know as much about his parentage as we do about Mugsy and Turnip's alleged children.
We can only guess at what is going on behind Palace walls. But it doesn't seem to me like Charles is favoring Turnip. Turnip is in Siberia. The website is being left more or less dormant to avoid giving the litigious agrieved Twats in California any more ammunition before the matter is definitively settled. In fact, I read the current state of the Royal website as a passive rebuke to the two arrogant tossers. Ie, "Your existence is so irrelevant to this Firm and We have so many other pressing and important matters to attend to, We cannot be bothered to even command a staff flunky to take your names off. It is at the very bottom of our list of priorities, as are you." Somehow I think being kept on the website toward the bottom, with photos half the size of that given to the Dukes of Kent and York would be more galling to Narcs than being left off altogether. If KCIII has them removed whilst they are still 'officially' the D&D of Sussex, he'd only fuel their deluded sense of righteous indignation. Non-movement on this matter could be read as a form of gray-rocking.
We will have to see what develops. If Lady C has her ear to the ground, maybe she will share some hints of the Spring Surprise in due course.
Sandie, to my knowledge, the weapon was semi-automatic which means one pull of the trigger, one bullet dispensed. The news readers, not journalists because there aren't any now, know nothing about firearms. The state of Maine has constitutional carry, which means that any of the adults present that are legally allowed to have firearms could have pulled out their handgun and shot the perpetrator. They weren't carrying because the establishments sold alcohol so they were not supposed to carry weapons. This cost several their lives and the lives of their family members. Mass shootings take place in establishments such as theaters and schools and bars and restaurants where law-abiding citizens leave their weapons at home or in their vehicles. The government is not calling for confiscating arms from criminals. They want to take them from law-abiding people. Hmmmm.
The perpetrator *should not* have had any weapon due to his mental illness. For some reason, his mental illness was not followed up on and he had a weapon. The government has played catch and release with violent mentally-ill people as well as violent criminals. We have no idea who is pouring across our borders. The government is not going to take care of us. It is up to us.
More mass shootings have been prevented from being worse by armed people that you *never* read about. For example, during the University of Texas tower shooting in 1966, professors and students engaged in covering fire at the tower while the wounded were rescued and, sadly, some of the rescuers were killed. The toll would have been far worse without the returned fire. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Texas_tower_shooting
The most horrific school shootings were so deadly because the police at the scene refused to act. More children and teachers were shot and killed. More little victims bled to death. I would remind you that the truck massacre in Nice killed 86 and injured another 434 people. If people are determined to commit murder, there are a lot of ways to go about it.
New Harry Markle up yesterday.
Apologies: Smokey Robinson
The Tracks of My Tears
Tears for Fears
Megsie thinks she’s the soul
of royalty
‘cause she turned a trick or two
We’re all laughing
at her insanity
deep down it’s true
So take a good look at her face
You’ll see the smirk
rictus grimace
If you look closer, ready to brace
the cracks in her veneers
Kneeled you, kneeled two, kneeled who
Since she left UK
a daily hurl her guttural song
Faking like she’s having fun
Although she thinks she’s cute
She’s just a prostitute
Megs, you’re just about done…
@Hikari
I wholly agree with your
incisive, perceptive comments
on Charles.
I do believe he’s a good man
and has the makings of a
good King.
As for h, no fatted calf
for the litigious son.
God Save the King
Well said! But the issue of the royal website is not so much that they are still present there, but what it says about them. (The website seems to have been updated at last, but what it is still 'problematic'.) Here are excerpts:
-----
As announced in January 2020, The Duke and Duchess have stepped back as senior members of The Royal Family. They are balancing their time between the United Kingdom and North America, continuing to honour their duty to The King, the Commonwealth, and their patronages.
https://www.royal.uk/the-duke-of-sussex
All photographs used are without TBW and are taken from social media accounts of the Prince and Princess of Wales, and all text (a very positive depiction of him) is only related to continuation of work he was already doing as a royal before TBW. There is no mention of Archwell or any of the connections to what he is doing in America. It is almost as if this is a portrait of what and who they wish he was, and thus a complete denial of reality. But perhaps it can be seen as a clear indication to hapless that he is loved and valued, but this is the person they love and value and who has a place in the family. It comes across increasingly as delusional to me and others, and some see it as dangerous denial.
-----
The Duchess of Sussex, born Rachel Meghan Markle, married Prince Harry at St George's Chapel, Windsor in May 2018. The Duke and Duchess have two children, Prince Archie of Sussex and Princess Lilibet of Sussex.
As announced in January 2020, The Duke and Duchess have stepped back as senior members of The Royal Family. They are balancing their time between the United Kingdom and North America, continuing to honour their duty to the Monarch, the Commonwealth, and their patronages.
The Duchess will continue to support a number of charitable causes and organisations which reflect the issues with which she has long been associated including the arts, access to education, support for women and animal welfare.
The Duchess’s official titles are The Duchess of Sussex, Countess of Dumbarton and Baroness Kilkeel.
https://www.royal.uk/the-duchess-of-sussex
As of today, this is what the royal website says about TBW. The two photos used of her in her biography section are from before she even met hapless, and the text mostly focuses on the image she created for herself when she ensnared hapless ("social justice and women's empowerment"). Once again, what is left out is interesting, and this section seems to be a projection of who they wish she was rather than who she actually is.
My view is the same, Swampie. Since the Countess DUMBarton is so obsessive in checking what's written about her on the Internet, it's a safe bet that she visits the Royal page several times a week at least to see if there've been any changes vis. Herself. She might be a bit appeased that Catherine has a half-sized photo, same as hers, but not that hers is below the Princess of Wales, of course. As Sandie points out, it's utterly nonsensical for the bios of the Turnip Twats to insist that they are 'still' splitting their time between the UK and California, that they have any charitable endeavours on behalf of the Royal family or that they have ever supported the monarch since they married. But imagine the screeches that would emanate from Montecito (allegedly) if their bios were to be altered to reflect current realities. Eg:
Prince Harry is the second son of King Charles III. After shamefully abusing his late grandparents, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II and The Duke of Edinburgh and shirking his Royal duties, he ran off overseas with his wife where he spends his time pursuing his hobbies of recreational drug useage, groundless lawsuits against media outlets, and generally running through the money left to him by his late mother, Princess Diana.
Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex is the self-proclaimed mother of two children, Prince Archie Harrison, 4, and Princess Lilibet Diana, 2, who remain as-yet unmet by any of their Royal family members. In addition to her self-appointed role as the Duke's agent-manager, she is pursuing a return to the Hollywood stardom she enjoyed before her marriage and acts as the unofficial spokeswoman for various products.
To alter anything would be to give the two losers the satisfaction of knowing that they were a topic of conversation/concern/responsibility for Harry's father or for anyone who works for the Palace. The defunct and fraudulent biographies reflect the two defunct and fraudulent individuals represented, IMO. Aristocratic shade of the most subtle kind . . .by allowing those patently false statements to stand, it's like trolling the liars with their own deluded statements about 'supporting the monarch' and service being universal. Those bios just lay there like dead fish. It will not be lost on Harry's wife that she has been removed from any pictures featuring her husband, the actual Royal. The white ensemble she's sporting in the photo was during the engagement, maybe? More than 5 years old, at any rate . . it highlights not only how badly she's aged in 5 years, but that the R. Turnip of 5 years ago was the last time she was relevant to the the workings of the Firm. Leaving their web entries unaltered is another demonstration that they are being completely ignored. Any updates to their information would feed them the kind of negative attention they get off on for their victim narrative. I do think the matter of the Sussex children's existence and legitimacy for titles and spots in the LOS are being discussed at the very highest levels of government, but those discussions are top-secret.
"Parasitic family members" . . couldn't have said it better. Hairy Turnip and the Mrs. are the equivilent of Cousin Eddie and his wife from "National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation."
My view is the same, Swampie. Since the Countess DUMBarton is so obsessive in checking what's written about her on the Internet, it's a safe bet that she visits the Royal page several times a week at least to see if there've been any changes vis. Herself. She might be a bit appeased that Catherine has a half-sized photo, same as hers, but not that hers is below the Princess of Wales, of course. As Sandie points out, it's utterly nonsensical for the bios of the Turnip Twats to insist that they are 'still' splitting their time between the UK and California, that they have any charitable endeavours on behalf of the Royal family or that they have ever supported the monarch since they married. But imagine the screeches that would emanate from Montecito (allegedly) if their bios were to be altered to reflect current realities. Eg:
Prince Harry is the second son of King Charles III. After shamefully abusing his late grandparents, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II and The Duke of Edinburgh and shirking his Royal duties, he ran off overseas with his wife where he spends his time pursuing his hobbies of recreational drug useage, groundless lawsuits against media outlets, and generally running through the money left to him by his late mother, Princess Diana.
Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex is the self-proclaimed mother of two children, Prince Archie Harrison, 4, and Princess Lilibet Diana, 2, who remain as-yet unmet by any of their Royal family members. In addition to her self-appointed role as the Duke's agent-manager, she is pursuing a return to the Hollywood stardom she enjoyed before her marriage and acts as the unofficial spokeswoman for various products.
To alter anything would be to give the two losers the satisfaction of knowing that they were a topic of conversation/concern/responsibility for Harry's father or for anyone who works for the Palace. The defunct and fraudulent biographies reflect the two defunct and fraudulent individuals represented, IMO. Aristocratic shade of the most subtle kind . . .by allowing those patently false statements to stand, it's like trolling the liars with their own deluded statements about 'supporting the monarch' and service being universal. Those bios just lay there like dead fish. It will not be lost on Harry's wife that she has been removed from any pictures featuring her husband, the actual Royal. The white ensemble she's sporting in the photo was during the engagement, maybe? More than 5 years old, at any rate . . it highlights not only how badly she's aged in 5 years, but that the R. Turnip of 5 years ago was the last time she was relevant to the the workings of the Firm. Leaving their web entries unaltered is another demonstration that they are being completely ignored. Any updates to their information would feed them the kind of negative attention they get off on for their victim narrative. I do think the matter of the Sussex children's existence and legitimacy for titles and spots in the LOS are being discussed at the very highest levels of government, but those discussions are top-secret.
"Parasitic family members" . . couldn't have said it better. Hairy Turnip and the Mrs. are the equivilent of Cousin Eddie and his wife from "National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation."
this DM article about an interview with the Duke of Beaufort is interesting as it reveals some of the hidden side of the English aristocracy and also some tidbits about the Queen and the BRF
It starts out with some pranks of Hairball's but doesn't spend much time discussing him.
@Hikari is right and they're best left as they are. I wonder if the BRF is actually discreetly trolling the Harkles. Their website says They are balancing their time between the United Kingdom and North America... but they spend 90% of their time out of the UK - * 100% - ...continuing to honour their duty to The King, the Commonwealth, and their patronages. Ha ha! Those two do not honour anyone or anything.
I think it's Charles' policy of laissez-faire and not wanting to upset the apple cart, as with the LoS. This is not a sign of weakness but of wisdom.
`The Archwells, an Everyday Story of Faux-Royal Folk':
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCtF6rzBzr0
I don't know where this is from, but it is about Scobie's forthcoming book. It is shocking.
I strongly disagree with this part of your bio for TBW:
"she is pursuing a return to the Hollywood stardom she enjoyed before her marriage"
I would suggest something like:
"she is pursuing the Hollywood stardom that was beyond her reach before her marriage to the prince, through any means"
But I do get the irony of your statement. In fact, her status in Hollywood is now lower than before, when she was able to get roles in Hallmark movies at the height of her Hollywood adjacent career. Even those are not on offer to her now. Her previous brief appearances in TV and movies, starring well-known names in Hollywood, like Jennifer Aniston, also seem to be out of reach now, and her display of her comic talents on Oprah seem to not have impressed anyone.
The DM article is filled with gossip and a good read. This is the part about hapless:
-----
On a warm evening in 2000, the fountain in the centre of the circular swimming-pool was shooting water high into the air, creating a spectacular setting for my niece's 18th birthday party.
One of the guests was Prince Harry, 16 at the time, who'd come over from Highgrove — about five miles from Badminton, our family estate in Gloucestershire. Initially he seemed to blend in quite well, but he suddenly became possessed, lifted a girl over his shoulder, walked over to the swimming pool and hurled her in.
There was a predictable outburst of laughter from the other guests and Harry, pleased with this reaction, continued to indulge himself by repeating the performance with several other girls, one after another.
There seemed to be a law of diminishing returns in terms of audience response, but relentlessly he kept on with his mission; he rather reminded me of a man picking up sacks of coal and chucking them on to the back of a lorry.
The problem was that none of the girls had brought other clothes to change into and, had Harry's performance continued, the party would have been ruined.
A bit overawed by his royal status, I was rather slow to stop him, so it was lucky that Steve — butler to my father, the Duke of Beaufort — was also at the party. In no uncertain terms, Steve told Harry to stop at once.
As the soaking girls were taken up to the house to borrow some clothes, my younger brother Johnson came up to me.
Imitating the voice of J. R. Ewing from the American soap, Dallas, he said: 'We gotta be real careful that nothin' happens to that boy's older brother … real careful.'
My faux bios up above for the Hairy Turnips were me being satirical. Of course Mrs. Turnip the mattress actress never enjoyed stardom except in her own mind. It’s hard to know if her mental disorders, and Turnip’s too make them even capable of distinguishing reality from their constructed fantasies about themselves. I saw a story online yesterday that proclaimed that the Sussexes were “the latest victims” of the Family Guy show that poked fun at their pretensions. Incredibly thin-skinned, can’t take a joke or face reality—that’s our Turnip Twats. They are both suffering from the folie a deux that bragging about doing something is the same as doing it and therefore they deserve universal worship. I don’t think these two are going to take accountability no matter what happens. They both belong in a madhouse.
Harry - 5 of Hearts (grief/loss/depressed)
Guess what card it is? THE 5 OF HEARTS AS ALWAYS. (I'm honestly starting to hate this card)
He's grieving everything he's lost.
Meghan - 8 of Clubs (rapid change/quick/communication), 10 of Spades (betrayal/back-stab/dead end)
There's something unexpected that happened. Things have turned sour for her.
I pulled a clarifier and it looks like someone she knew backstabbed/betrayed her...
https://www.tumblr.com/is-mayo-an-instrument/732407395189473280/smol-energy-reading-harry-meghan?source=share&ref=justsdv
thanks for the link about Scobie's book
I am always amazed at the lengths that some people go to to portray themselves as victims.
I know of a narcissist, for example, who was graciously offered free samples of new antidepressant medication by a physician friend of mine. The samples had been given by a pharma rep so that the physician could provide his patients with this new medication. ( we don't get medicine paid for unless one is lucky enough to work for a company that provides this benefit) This narc then turned around and made it seem like she was being used as a guinea pig for FDA approval of the medication. Mutual friends were aghast at the idea that the physician was abusing the narc's 'vulnerability' when in fact, he was trying to help her.
I agree completely with what both Hikari and Maneki Neko have said. Yes, it's very galling but have the critics wanting them excised thought it through?
To remove them without explanation would only drive the Harkles into fresh rages, increasing criticism of CRIII & PoW, and those ordinary folk who are unfamiliar with the intricacies of `The Story So Far' will raise their voices demanding to know why.
It would appear to be a act of petty vindictiveness, when I doubt if a full, legally sound, explanation can be given at this point. What evidence can be presented that would `stand up in Court'? It would be no more than a set assertions supported by no irrefutable evidence..
As for Parliament changing the law- well, that law was passed precisely to make sure nobody ever tried to pass off a usurper child as a legitimate heir, following the rumours about the son of James II and Mary of Modena.
Furthermore, I rather think it would necessitate the revision of a whole chunk of law about inheritance as well and doubtless Parliament has other, more important, matters to deal with first.
It’s all great fun until somebody gets hurt, As any of the girls might’ve been. I doubt Harry would’ve been solicitous about potentially cracking their heads on the side of the pool as he was tossing them in unawares. Aristos are fairly careless about their expensive clothes and possessions, because they can always get more. Sometimes the carelessness extends to the clothing and possessions of other people. I’m sure these girls spent a lot of time getting ready for the party and it was not the kind of night they had anticipated, or else they would have worn bathing suits. Just another illustration as if we needed proof that Hazardous does not recognize appropriate boundaries. His behavior is often manic. And it’s well documented that he was already abusing the chemicals by the age of 14, so he was probably high as a kite on cocaine and or drunk while he was playing toss the girls. 23 years after this incident, he hasn’t matured any. This is pretty tragic. It was probably around the time of this incident that aristocratic fathers started warning their daughters off this kid. Harold was never going to make a successful marriage or be a dutiful, conscientious public servant. Herald belongs in an institution. Is it a wonder, or was it just inevitable that across a vast ocean, both geographically and culturally, Harold found a female version of himself? It’s the Joker and Harley Quinn come to life. H is the Harley to Murkle’s Joker.
years ago, he already had coke bloat
warning - hazznoballs in a speedo
Harry & Meghan's cohorts move against Prince William & The King using red herrings & fantasy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2E8VnltLFPw&t=1831s
Phantasia
Haz has no balls
neither have brains
Regarding their children
no-one explains
Do they exist
as in mind and body
Or are they just figments
in a plot rather shoddy…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJr7a7275ag
It's about the DofW and a proposal that he become King of Hanover after WW2, in 1946, interesting in its own right but also mentions the 2 Ds of Brunswick, Ernest Augustus I & Ernest Augustus II , the late 19th & early 20thC royal cousins in Germany.
The original Eugenie & Beatrice were Victoria's daughters, so perhaps Eug decided to continue reviving names - but it does seem unfortunate, given how we tend to see her these days.
To trace the link, it's in the post called `Revolution', a long way down, at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJr7a7275ag&t=63s&ab_channel=MarkFeltonProductions
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/17ijea3/revolution/
You will find a summary here of the Byline Investigates allegations, contained in a number of articles. ITV has picked up the story and is reporting it as fact, without any questioning. This is what Lady C is foaming at the mouth about.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/17is29t/my_sugar_friend_just_posted_this/
The stories by Byline Investigates are filled with omissions and factual inaccuracies. This is clearly sourced from the duo themselves and is designed to change the 'narrative' and cause as much damage as possible. Christian Jones is one of the aides being targeted.
The duo were funded from the Duchy of Cornwall, very generously, for 6 months after they stopped performing their royal roles. The true scandal perhaps is that Charles was technically not allowed to do that. I'll dig up the information and do a post on that.
They also had no right to be funded by the Sovereign Grant for those last 6 months, but they were, to pay for staff and administrative expenses in the UK even though they were no longer working royals.
Removal of security happened when they were still in Canada, but that was decided by the government and not the sovereign or royal family.
It is quite clear that they were negotiating personal private commercial deals way before Megxit, because they wanted the half in-half out deal ... office and staff and clothing, travel etc. for appearances funded by the SG; only do the 'work' they chose to do in supporting the sovereign, as and when and how they wanted; full 24/7 security wherever they were and whatever they were doing; the full allowance from Charles ... this is what the Queen very generously asked a team to consider and the Queen concluded that it was not viable in any form and they had to choose ... either fully in or fully out, and they were given a year, on top of the 3 or 4 months, to change their mind either way if they wished to.
This is all such a mess, but it shows that they have never let go of the bitter resentment that they did not get what they demanded in their manifesto.
I don't see how Charles and William can simply ignore this with 'never complain, never explain', but engaging with these brats simply indulges a nasty and unwarranted tantrum.
What is happening is Megxit on steroids.
95% of their annual income came from the Duchy of Cornwall through Charles. That is why they were so willing to give up the Sovereign Grant money ... they never expected Charles to stop giving them funding from the Duchy. Charles did the ethical thing in stopping that funding, but I do not think there was anything in the law that required him to do so. I may be wrong about that. It is kind of like a second son going off to start his own rival company but still expecting daddy to provide a generous income from his company. Imagine the uproar if income from the Duchy was used to support the duo in California?
The bottom line is that the duo walked away with a fortune. That they have not been able to use that fortune to become billionaires (the lifestyle they want) is no one's fault but their own.
A tweet from the time when they were in Canada 'on leave'. It basically says: they will extend their 'leave', she insists on controlling all marketing for sussexroyal, an inability to work with long-standing family aides, which was causing tension, the talk is how best to represent the family.
https://x.com/BarkJack_/status/1566448672983994371?s=20
September 2020 they were planning their victim-centred documentary about their 'struggles'. They were definitely pitching by January 2021. (My comment: from what was shown in the documentary, they were filming just about everything right from the start of their relationship.)
Timeline: they went off to Canada in November 2019
October 2019, a source close to the couple spoke to People, stating that they could establish a second base in the U.S., Canada or Africa to escape tabloid scrutiny.
November 2019 they went to Canada for a 6-week 'break' and ended up staying for 4 months.
January 2020 they released their manifesto, followed by the Sandringham Summit, followed by hard Megxit.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megxit
The above Wikipedia contains some verifiable dates and statements directly from the couple in interviews and documentaries that verify the 'official' narrative as told ad nauseam in the British press. The Byline Investigates articles completely ignore these facts in trying to rewrite the story and claim victimhood yet again. This is how the duo operate, even when the strategy ultimately fails and backfires.
I do believe that she was the 'mastermind' behind it all and that the half-in, half-out plan was to appease him. The talk of Canada and South Africa and so on was her 'cover' and she had to lead him into a position where LA was the only option. It was most useful to get the idiot to take full responsibility for everything. She believed she would return to LA as a powerful A-lister and the initial success in signing deals fuelled her delusions. Once she had the title and the money and had established herself as globally a very famous woman, she had no further need for the royal family or the UK. She tolerates his visits to the UK, but for how much longer, especially as it costs money to make those trips - money that she would regard as being 'stolen from her'.
(reported in the piece about H chucking girls into the pool)
I hope that Royal Security has that displayed somewhere they can see it every day - it has a such an ominous ring to it - young Johnson was really astute.
thank you. Try as I may, I couldn't figure out the issue as Lady C was dragging out stories from the pregnancy, etc.
This is the gist of what Lady C said, explaining why she was livid. Please read.