The recent post which does mention that the information is speculative and the response got me thinking.
It was the one about having them be present at Christmas but must produce the kids.
Interesting thought, isn't it?
Would they show? What would we see? Would there now be photos from the rota?
We often hear of just some rando meeting of rando strangers. It's odd, isn't it that random strangers just happen to recognize her/them and they have a whole conversation. Most recently it was from some stranger who raved in some video (link not supplied in the article) that they met and talked and listened to HW talk about her daughter. There was the requisite comment about HW of how she is/was so kind). If people are kind, does the world need strangers to tell us (are we that kind of stupid?) or can we come to that conclusion by seeing their kindness in action? Service.
They seem to always be talking about their kids, parenthood and yet, they never seem to have the kids with them at that moment or the meeting doesn't happen at the dentist or pediatrician's office. Maybe kids like to do the drive through of the fast food or join their parents for lunch at a not fast food place.
Wait a minute - where are the body guards when this was going down? Aren't they necessary to protect the couple (and the kids)? Strangers might do harm and how they require security to be safe.
Let's switch gears and think about the kids.
When do we see them?
They didn't travel along the recent blink your eyes and you'll miss island trip. Not much in the way of whole family vacations even to visit family friendly spots in the US like Smithsonian or Exploratorium. The Tar Pits are fairly local and would have dinosaurs (usually a hit with kids). Or the Grand Canyon or Boston (lots of history) or just fun on Hawaiian beaches. The Natural Museum of History is a kid's dream in NYC. All these places and yet no kid trips to show the kids the country they live in - even when the parents have a trip to that city. Those are photos are with OPK (other people's kids). Their kids don't see their parents doing the good or making the speech.
When they are seen, they seem to have this in common:
It is a very brief time period - a couple of shots but does not appear to cover a prolonged period of time. (meaning the people on the periphery don't seem to move or change a lot).
It is shot from a distance. Not closeups. Even though we all know that telephoto lenses exist (even for phones). And, often taken showing the back of the adult and minimal view of kid.
Often it is a public holiday "gathering" of some sort but not a lot of listed adult friends (who don't have a working professional relationship with them) or even just friends of the kids along for the fun. Do these kids even have friends? If they do, there are things like birthday parties and play dates. And in school, there are often class photos for year books (even in pre-school). Later on there will be plays and science fairs.
No outside confirmation. Yes there are people who say they met the kids at interviews and the like but no photos. Ever. Even when it was all these high profile famous people who popped in to see the new baby Archie. Or, no photos even in the background from other strangers at the same event. So although they could have been at some event but how long did they stay after the photos were taken?
Even when they supply the photos of the kids, there is a feeling that the photos always seem to raise more questions than answers.
Christmas is weeks and weeks away. A lot can happen before the walk to the Church happens.
Comments
I hope this puts him off of suing everyone and everything.
I think the Independent got it mixed up—they conflated “damages” with “legal costs.” Harry “only” has to pay MoS 48,447 pounds.
The BBC said it was `damages' (payment in reparation to injured party) others say `costs' (paying the other party's court fees occasioned by your legal action? Nothing to do with the fees one pays one's own lawyers).
Can anyone clarify, please?
Comments in the above post are excellent ... analysing the financials for Archwell.
Lots more information about the financials.
She released a video of all her 'charity' work for the year starting with Uvalde. Tone deaf and very weird!
https://www.tumblr.com/royal-ossa/736366664184168448?source=share
Bear in mind this is tarot and people have free will. The situation can change as people do. This is how it stood at the time of the reading.
Will the Sussexs be removed from the website?
Overall energy:King of Swords. Four of Cups
Reading energy:7 of cups, 3 of wands, knight of cups, queen of hazards, the Tower
KCIII is in charge here. He's pretty sick of the lies/manipulation/shenanigans. He's beyond weary. Charles is involved in some high pressure projects. These are projects he feels passionate about and has spent a great deal of time on. Harry is draining him. Even more so, Meghan has gotten extremely interfering. She finds ways to be heard and is always the third person involved in any talks they have had.
After Omid released his book, Charles would like to deny it all and be left alone. His frustration continues to rise to new heights. Throughout the reading I did keep hearing "I miss the good old days and how it used to be".
Multiple choices have been presented. It's confusing to even know which ones to address. They will take a bit of time to sort out what to address, how to address it. Realization that a decision must be made.
This will be a large team effort, bringing in knowledgeable people to sort out the best options. It's a dream team, if you will.
In due time, the Sussexs will also be sending someone from across the sea. He is a clever snake charmer who is in love with himself. The King needs to watch out for this guy. He's good with words and promises that mean nothing. A real charmer that some will fall for.
...
Queen of Hazards in this deck is definitely Meghan. Smack in it, she poses a problem in the process. What my deck says (paraphrased): obsessive with the trappings of life. It's a shame because she is losing out on other opportunities. She will want something just to have it, though can't use it. She has blurred the lines between needs and wants. She made all the effort to wear finely stitched clothing....then ruins the effort by wearing cheap, over the counter mascara that isn't waterproof. This zombie knows what she wants out of life and works darn hard to get it. She will fight tooth and nail but it comes at a cost.
She is being relentless in her demands. It is a big factor in the weariness of Charles.
As a side note, Charles has had some pivotal meetings at COP28. It was not all about environmental causes. WEF wants to up the agenda for change. I think the censorship issues will be seeing a push. Resistance is mounting and WEF wants to be more aggressive in pushing that down. Harry doesn't help that Charles and him have the same agenda in common but are finding difficulties working together.
Told you the cards were chatty.
Once this is put to bed, don't be surprised if Charles takes a rest. Probably in Scotland. I'm not sure we are seeing how exhausted he's let himself become. Seriously, the guy pines for the good old days.
Tower card. I get big energy that it's really bad for the Sussexs but also the monarchy as a result. I'm going with the feeling no one gets out alive from this. Every reading I've been doing on the monarchy, and anyone in it, I get the Tower card. There may even be some scandal involved. Regardless, a shake up is coming. Here's what the deck says (paraphrased): If you decide to live the high life, you have to accept there will be risks in exchange for a great view. The zombies are in the house. And they didn't come with embossed invites to show they were invited. Looks like you could be outnumbered, so it looks like the world you knew is about to go through some pretty intense change. This will be a big lesson learned. Next time, have an escape plan.
A lesson is given. Read between the lines. Do listen to people and try to see through what they say to actually hear what they are not saying.
Based on all that I did a series of yes no questions.
Are the Sussexs off the website? 6 of cups reversed = No. There's still feelings of being stuck in the past
Is Harry removed from the Line of Succession? Hanged Man = Yes. Surrender card, new perspective
Is Harry removed as Counselor of State? 8 of Hazards = Yes. If they put in hard work and commitment, stay true to values and have patience it can change back
https://www.tumblr.com/mysteriouslytransparentwitch/736402189647593472/tarot-reading-meghan-markle-11-december?source=share
Costs, not damages. Hapless applied for a summary judgment, in his favour, but he lost that bid. He must pay costs DM incurred in arguing against the summary judgment 'victory' for hapless.
Remember when the witch sued the DM? She also applied for a summary judgment and got one, in her favour.
We like to blame Harry yet the decision to apply to strike out would have been (presumably) after his lawyers advised him as to likelihood of success - or maybe they were just winging it.
Donations to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Archewell Foundation have plunged by $11million (£8.7m) in the past year - sending it into the red - with boss and the couple's right-hand man James Holt handed a massive 280% pay rise, it was revealed today."
I'm not sure why their right-hand man deserved such massive pay rise, especially in view of the drop in donations.
The rest in the DM.
http://tinyurl.com/ycywf7j6
-----------
@Sandie
She released a video of all her 'charity' work for the year starting with Uvalde. Tone deaf and very weird!
Perhaps because there was a video of Catherine and her three children helping volunteers at a "baby bank", which helps provide support for families with young children. Told you * would try to go one better, except the children are as invisible as ever.
If, Charles told the Harkles to divorce, there would have to be stringent conditions, viz. one payment only, no interviews or articles, no 'revelations', controlled access to the children (if real). Take it or leave it and H ordered back to the UK and no contact with *.
The problem as I see it is that * would never abide by those terms. Any terms. Her thirst for attention is so overwhelming that it overrides any impulse to self-control she might once have had. * respects nobody or nothing . . she thinks she is above the law and any and all rules that govern other people. She knows right from wrong--which is why she makes elaborate double-blinds and shifts blame for negative outcomes on other people. Or, when out and out accused of misdeeds, (ie, perjury in a court of law) she turns on the waterworks and plays the damsel who is a victim of her own faulty memory or some staffer misplaced the paperwork or she was up all night with the children or some such blatant sympathy grab. No one's buying that any more but if she refuses to acknowledge consequences for rule breaking, there's no containing her. What could the head of a foreign state do, have her jailed? No, he can't. So from the safety of her home country she will continue to do as she likes.
Even if the RF releases material about her scandalous past, she'll have more fodder for her howls about racist abuse and misogyny. Even the worst revelation imaginable--that she never was pregnant or has any children by surrogacy and has been having us all on for the last 5 years . . that would torpedo anyone with a normal sense of shame or embarrassment. Not her. She will turn that around on the family too, if it comes out. You watch.
Even among the ranks of the criminally minded, Harry's wife is a class by herself. There is no reasoning with either of them.
********
One does feel for a 75-year-old King who is being relentlessly harassed and hounded by a son and the wife which was so warmly embraced into the family with the best of intentions.
Lear, anyone? Lear had daughters, not sons, who were at each other's throats, each aided and abetted by weaker, collunding husbands . .but the comparison fits. Charles has a thespian's heart; he'd recognize the parallels.
How sharper than a serpent's tooth it is to have an ungrateful child!
Seriously, this level of stress cannot be good for his health. Does Hapless want to put his father into an early grave? That ain't gonna be a good outcome for him and the wife. The next sovereign in line ain't playing these games of appeasement.
Tragic situation - too much like how Edward VIII dumped his brother into the top job but tried to wangle his way back by very wicked ways. Apparently, HM the Queen Mother never forgave him for the chain of events which ultimately led to her husband's death aged only 56 - stress of wartime role & consequent heavy smoking, to fatal lung cancer.
My prayers for the Harkles are distinctly unchristian.
@Opus, I agree totally with your point about justice being for the rich (said with great feeling) especially if narcissists are involved.
Your last post sounded familiar and I was the one who wrote about a Harkles divorce (5 December). I agree that * is contrary and difficult to handle - and I'm being flattering. I think if she was put before the fait accompli, there's little she could do. If H and the children, if there are any, were out of harm's way in some royal property, what could she do? Theoretically, give interviews and write books etc, but I think she's exhausted that rich vein. People are sick to the back teeth of H&* and I'd like to think that no one would touch her with a barge pole. The BRF could put out a statement to the effect that the separation was mutually agreed, ostensibly to spare her feelings but in reality to preempt any nasty reactions. It probably sounds naive... but in any case she wouldn't have the financial means to fight the BRF, and they have a lot more clout than she ever will. Here's hoping...
On Monday, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's charitable organization published its annual Impact Report, which revealed that Meghan, 42, quietly launched a new initiative this year that was inspired by the Hubb Community Kitchen she supported in her royal role in the U.K.
Dubbed The Welcome Project, the program supports “women-led programming for recently resettled Afghan women to help build more inclusive and connected communities."
During the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s visit to a joint military base in New Jersey on Veteran’s Day in 2021, Meghan connected with women from displaced Afghan families living there and learned that they needed a place to build community, cook and spend time together.
Harry and Meghan began brainstorming from there, and the Archewell Foundation partnered with Team Rubicon and Welcome.US to find a way to help families navigate the challenges of resettling in the U.S.
After hearing repeatedly about the "intense social isolation women in particular were experiencing," the Archewell Foundation launched The Welcome Project this year. With its focused programming, the venture brings access to critical resources, educational opportunities, workforce development, employment, and entrepreneurship, the report states.
https://archive.ph/2023.12.12-182719/https://people.com/meghan-markle-prince-harry-launch-welcome-project-inspired-royal-work-impact-report-archewell-foundation-8414759
The entire article clearly says it is her project. No, it is not. She simply attached herself to get publicity and donated a few thousand dollars.
This is the Welcome Project. The witch and hapless are not mentioned anywhere and it is clearly not a project started or run by them.
https://www.welcomeproject.org/eng-homepage.html
https://www.welcomeproject.org/eng-homepage.html
"it appears that the first corporation received $68,895
Archewell spent $118,895 in total administering this grant.
and
The second entity received $50,000
Archewell spent a total of $136,182 administering this grant."
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/18gv6zy/archewell_tax_irregularities/
Thanks for responding to my post about the divorce. I would’ve credited you but I didn’t keep your name attached to your quote, sorry. I had almost forgotten that I put that in my drafts folder a week and a half ago.
I think Madam could still inflict plenty of reputational damage from LA even if Harry goes back to England permanently. Front and center of everybody’s mind is going to be “the children”. No matter how increasingly miserable the Harkles look in public, they can promote themselves as “staying together for the children, because we are such great parents!” If they split, particularly if Harry initiates it, look for an Angelina Jolie/Amber Heard nuclear attack. In the guise of “sainted mommy” she’s going to accuse him of child abandonment, abuse, They’ll be all kinds of pictures of him high, She will go into great detail about sexually deviant things he “forced” upon her when we know who was actually driving that bus and schooling him in the urban dictionary.
No matter what terrible thing we think are capable of, she’s 100 times worse and she’s already thought of it and more. If King Charles doesn’t play ball with an endless stream of cash, Look for more belated “recollections” of racist and misogynistic abuse toward her and her half black “kids”. She might claim that royal staff members sexually assaulted her and that was swept under the carpet. Look for another illuminating sit down with some media personality to talk about these revelations or she could just go online and post her own video that would go viral within hours. The damage could be done before anyone in London is even up for breakfast. She’s a complete loose cannon. She really doesn’t look well these days but I think she’ll keep going on her course of self-destruction hell-bent on destroying the royal family, and principally Catherine’s peace of mind, Until she puts somebody into the ground.
Our only hope is that the IRIS will see to it that she is jailed for very long time for all her financial wangling, in a very secure prison through whose walls from which no cheep of fury can penetrate.
It's hard to see what might cut through the problem, even if we were to wait for years. No deus ex machina descending, no Mephistopheles coming to claim little Miss Faust, no animated statue sending her into Hell in a strong bass voice The Commendatore singing `Meghan Mark-le!' rather than Don Giova-nni' would be quite something, for example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tjh9UCtx3Rk
Sadly, we have to wait for Nature to take its course.
Yes, there'll be at least one profile of ERII there - they'll have the begging bowl out and it'll be on the the coins.
DM:
Prince Harry ripped a poster of his grandmother the Queen off the wall of an 'underground' Chelsea club so she 'couldn't watch him partying', Paddy McGuinness claims
Prince Harry ripped a poster of his late grandmother, Queen Elizabeth, from a wall during a 'wild party' years ago, television presenter Paddy McGuinness has claimed.
The Top Gear star, 50, said he was on a night out with the Duke of Sussex, band members of One Direction and a group of footballers when he claims to have seen the royal remove the picture from a wall because he didn't want his grandmother to see his partying ways
Speaking on the Restless Natives podcast, McGuinness said the group were in an 'underground' club in Chelsea, London, where there was 'all sorts going on'.
He claimed that the royal was 'ripping my t-shirt off, ******* snogging and kissing me' and then 'ripped a photo of the Queen off the wall and said "I can't have her watching me doing this".'
Tinsel Town Tossed
Is this the final
nail in their coffin
Verbosity, grandiosity
YNE all for nothin’
Topped the losers
at Hollywood Reporter
The turkeys hung and drawn
prior to slaughter
Roasted, basted
over a pit of own goals
The devil’s daughter
pitched herself down those holes…
-----
Speaking on the Restless Natives podcast, McGuinness said the group were in an 'underground' club in Chelsea, London, where there was 'all sorts going on'.
He claimed that the royal was 'ripping my t-shirt off, ******* snogging and kissing me' and then 'ripped a photo of the Queen off the wall and said "I can't have her watching me doing this".'
He did not reveal when this was said to have happened, but told the podcast hosts Gordon Smart and Martin Compston that the club had a 'secret door' famous faces could use, that was surrounded by security cameras.
-----
https://archive.ph/2023.12.12-223901/https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-12856493/Prince-Harry-ripped-poster-grandmother-Queen-wall-underground-Chelsea-club-watch-partying-Paddy-McGuinness-claims.html
Icon for Recap eventReddit Recap
Expand search
Create post
Open inbox
2
User Avatar
Expand user menu
r/SaintMeghanMarkle icon
Go to SaintMeghanMarkle
r/SaintMeghanMarkle
8 hr. ago
wontyield
🗣DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM?! veneers🦷
The Spectator: The convenient timing of Meghan and Harry's Christmas video
Opinion
Original link: https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-convenient-timing-of-meghan-and-harrys-christmas-video/
Archive link: https://archive.is/s8x2H
Sumnary: An opinion on the timing of today's Archefail "impact" video PR stunt, public exhaustion of the Sussexes' repeated telling of their "truth", and the possibility of a desperate Harry ending up on the reality show circuit.
Excerpts:
There’s that well-known saying of ‘anything you can do, I can do better’. In what can only be an attempt to upstage the official Royal Family’s latest offering, this seems to be the credo of Harry and Meghan as they release a new, wholly vainglorious video showing the ‘impact’ of the Archewell foundation in 2023. If you’ve ever seen a teenager create a flashy ‘what I did on my holidays’ clip that is clearly designed to go viral on social media, you’ll have a good idea of what to expect from this entirely immodest offering.
It is a transparent PR job for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex – being filmed looking earnest on World Mental Health Day and gazing lovingly into one another’s eyes. As such, it joins the ranks of similar clips that have been released annually by the Archewell organisation: traditionally something to look forward to in January, along with a Christmas hangover, an income tax bill and cold, miserable weather.
The last few months have not been happy ones for Brand Sussex. The publication of Omid Scobie’s Endgame was mired in controversy, as the identities of the ‘royal racists’ were revealed via a snafu in the Dutch translation. Meanwhile, the book’s comparatively low sales, compared to the bestselling Finding Freedom, indicate that the public are sick and tired of the Duke and Duchess attempting to offer a deeply sanitised and largely unconvincing version of their actions in the public eye.
https://archive.is/2023.12.12-132926/https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-convenient-timing-of-meghan-and-harrys-christmas-video/
Thank you but no apology is necessary for not putting my name to the quote! It really doesn't matter but it sounded familiar and I thought you'd already replied.
Yes, * is maleficent but surely the RF have the means to muzzle her? She can rant and rave in the event of a divorce, if she's not the one who initiated it, but if she wants to rake mud, will anyone believe her? I think the RF knows a lot more about her that we don't - and that she doesn't suspect - so if she wants to start causing trouble, she might well lose. And what if the RF leak some info via 'sources' about a faux pregnancy, for instance? They wouldn't be so crass as to give an interview in The Sun, say, but if they wanted they could find a way to discredit it her. They could also be sneaky and promise - no revelations about the bump, then! - that the children will stay in the LoS but knowing in reality it means very little (William, please, don't travel with your children). Trevor Engelson and Corry Vitiello have both kept schtum about * because they're decent men; others, I don't know, maybe the truth has been suppressed. A lot could be resurrected. In the event of a war with the RF, I'd like to think she she won't win, especially as William has his father's ear and is resolute.
I totally agree. I replied to Hikari before reading your post. I said more or less the same thing, viz. BP and, although I didn't mention them, MI5 and MI6, have plenty of ammunition ( good word!). I agree they can release info, ever so discreetly, of course. And as you say, * has lost most of her credibility. She'd be stupid to oppose the RF but then we know she's not as smart as she thinks.
Harry and Meghan are slammed as some of the biggest losers in Hollywood by industry bible after their 'whiny' Netflix documentary
• The Hollywood Reporter published its list of biggest winners and losers of 2023
• Among the 11 'losers' were the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, singled out for their 'whiny Netflix documentary, whiny biography and an inert podcast'
• The winners included Taylor Swift, Margot Robbie and Greta Gerwig and union leader Fran Drescher: fellow losers were Marvel films, Elon Musk and Ezra Miller
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been named among the biggest Tinsel Town losers of the year by industry bible, The Hollywood Reporter.
The magazine published its 2023 review celebrating those who triumphed and noting those who failed to hit the mark.
Among the 11 chosen as having struggled were the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who were mocked for their 'whiny Netflix documentary, a whiny biography (Spare - even the title is a pouty gripe ) and inert podcast.'
. . .
Their treatment by The Hollywood Reporter was far from effusive, with the publication saying the couple had 'fled a life of ceremonial public service to cash in their celebrity status in the States' - but failed to ignite.
Ouch again. But I thought * was 'slotting back into Hollywood'??
What is of interest is who they donate to, how much, and how disproportionately large the administrative costs are for these donations. His 'royal' connected patronages seem to be ignored (Well Child, Invictus Games, African Parks), as are hers (she still uses three for publicity), and the focus seems to be on controlling the media, jumping on bandwagons (Ukraine), and her 'vision' of herself as fighting for women's rights, in a society where women are far more liberated than many others in the world. It all seems to be about ego and image and self-promotion (controlling the media is a huge part of that) rather than making a real difference.
Have the donations from the Sussex Squad dried up? They were very enthusiastic and prolific in fund-raising in previous years.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UF4wXYdEd8 video '
There is an agenda' Alexander Larman on 'royal racists' SpectatorTV
I have family narcs and they continue to follow the same patterns of how they treat us, their coworkers and love interests. They don't, however, tend to try to blow up the building so to speak when they don't get what they want. Themselves but not the surrounding countryside. They just go back and start over from scratch with new people (whining all the way about how terrible those people are/were to them without cause and if only people would do what is wanted, all would be fine). Or at least mine do (grateful? I don't know).
I do think that if there has been no big reveal, just a steady downward trend by inches, during the current reign, then there will be fireworks starting with the coronation plans for the next king by insisting that the return happen/insertion into the proceedings and positions of trust. We may not see them go off (probably at least at first), secrecy and all that, but if it is true that there was a similar push for the last coronation, there is not much reason to think that it would not be tried for again. Family ties and all that.
Also suspect it would not be directly fronted by her but him. Just like the Summit, she was not present but directing from afar. Win win. Either she gets what she wants or the option to cast the blame for not getting it.
Great comment on narcissism! It took so long for me to figure out that narcs are forever stuck on replay. They really think that if they keep digging, they will strike gold, so that hole just keeps getting deeper and more of a danger to them.
Some interesting tweets fromtheBarkJack account.
Crisis meeting at WME? I should hope so ... how long since she signed with them, and no deals?
https://x.com/BarkJack_/status/1734956118474948915?s=20
Further posts claim that there is a photo of the late Queen with Lilli but it was taken by the Queen's staff and the duo do not have possession of it.
Supposedly their Christmas Card has been put on hold,but I do not understand what that has to do with WME. They arenlt a PR firm ... they get deals.
I think we are a long way from the next coronation, to hazard a guess possibly five to ten years and by then who knows what the Harkles will be doing and if they're even still together. Once William is on the throne, I wouldn't fancy *'s chances. William will be implacable and ruthless.
There have been multiple crisis meetings regarding * during this past year of WME representation!! Just drop the trouble maker Ari , for goodness sakes. * has no talent as an actress except maybe sex-kitten and that ship has sailed, her reputation as difficult and nasty on set is well known in HW and she is untrustworthy and a liar. WME couldn’t even sell her as part of a bundle with several other favorable actors.
Also, why do these two weirdos even bother releasing their photoshopped XMas card to the press. They are no longer working Royals and if 1-4 on the LoS were gone, Parliament would vote to skip over #5,6,7. They are irrelevant.
After the fallout from the book left the British Royal Family reeling, friends close to the Duchess have disputed many of the claims made by Scobie in the book and have jumped to her defence.
They told The Sun the opposite of Scobie's claims are true, and that Sophie in fact went out of her way to make Meghan feel included and welcome in The Firm.
Friends close to the Duchess of Edinburgh insisted Sophie invited Meghan and Harry over for tea early on in their relationship to try and form a bond with her.
An insider described as a 'senior royal source' told the newspaper: 'It was just the two of them at and they talked for hours. Meghan had so many questions and Sophie, who knows what it's like navigating your way through the early days of transition from a commoner to a royal, gave freely of her advice.'
The source added that Sophie found Meghan 'engaging' and told her she could call any time.
Friends close to the Duchess of Edinburgh insisted Sophie invited Meghan and Harry over for tea early on in their relationship to try and form a bond with her.
An insider described as a 'senior royal source' told the newspaper: 'It was just the two of them at and they talked for hours. Meghan had so many questions and Sophie, who knows what it's like navigating your way through the early days of transition from a commoner to a royal, gave freely of her advice.'
The source added that Sophie found Meghan 'engaging' and told her she could call any time.
----------
Oh dear! This is going from bad to worse. In Scobie's book, everybody in the BRF is guilty of something but, surprise, surprise, the duo is totally blameless.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-12859635/Duchess-Edinburgh-furious-Omid-Scobies-claims-didnt-make-effort-support-Meghan-struggling-Firm-sources-claim.html#:~:text=The%20Duchess%20of%20Edinburgh%20is,to%20life%20in%20The%20Firm.
Yes, he will. Hazzard must know that his time is limited by the length of his father's reign.
Being the child of the sovereign is a a much bigger power position than being the sibling of a sovereign. The spares (Margaret, Anne, Hazmat) enjoy much greater proximity to the crown as heirs in the direct line but once they get relagated to sibling of the Crown, they are at most adjacent to it. When George ascends and H becomes the King's uncle, he'll be relegated a circle further out still. Whinging about an elder brother breaking one's necklace/dog bowl and being 'power mad' doesn't have the same shocking punch as claiming that your father beat you or mocked you or 'had concerns' about your theoretical baby's color. Charles is vulnerable because of his parental tie and because his reputation has never been strong in many quarters for a variety of reasons--Camilla, temperament, etc. The new Prince of Wales enjoys a more favorable and universal popularity. He exhibits more the the steeliness of mind perhaps characterized by his late grandfather, the Iron Duke, and isn't so tolerant of BS as perhaps his father has been where the ginger nut is concerned. Charles has got that soft heart and desire to be loved, though I think he is capable of decisive action, particularly now that he has come into his power. But William has always been less fluffy and more unforgiving of untrustworthy people around him. Even a brother. Especially a brother. William as King will be the traitors' worst nightmares.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1845249/the-crown-netflix-prince-harry
apparently, the story lines make it look like Harry was told to "hide his light under a bushel" so as not to outshine his brother William
15 November she interviewed Missam Harriman about a Netflix film he has done I must admit I first completely misread and thought she had involved herself in a Tyler Perry project, but no, their dear friend the photographer is the one she is using to stay relevant (and get the millions promised by the Netflix contract?), and the photographer is using her to get publicity.
"The film will be Missan's directorial debut and premiered at the opening night of the HollyShorts Film Festival on 10 August where it was awarded Best Live Action. According to Neon Films, the short therefore qualifies for the 2024 Oscars."
The photographs are from an event that took place a month ago. Hello magazine was used to get the publicity because the film and her appearance seems to have been ignored by the tabloids and mainstream media.
-----
https://archive.ph/2023.12.14-020729/https://themessenger.com/entertainment/prince-harry-meghan-markle-pda-holiday-party-soho-house-exclusive?utm_source=flipboard&utm_content=topic/celebritynews
And they were at a Soho House party in West Hollywood.
Harry and Meghan are on a list of Hollywood’s big losers? Ouch
A film industry bible has said the Sussexes’ star power is waning. Could it be right, asks Hilary Rose
A long interview with Scobie. Interestingly, he says he looked into the gossip about William and Rose Hanbury and found no evidence and concludes it is probably not true. He does not seem to have delved into where the rumour started, by who and why. All roads lead to Soho House, which is well known with that particular gossip! He does not seem to have done any digging on that aspect, so I wonder where he did the digging and why he came to the conclusions he did.
According to the article, they still want the half in/half out option. She wants an apartment in KP and will agree to spend 4 months of the year in the UK.
The tabloids are still calling the Welcome Project her project that she started. No it is not. She has nothing to do with the project, other than giving a small donation and a couple of hours doing volunteer work, which was actually a photo op appearance. Do these tabloid journalists ever do any research?
The issue was never spending part of the year outside of London— The queen saw right through her naked self promotional ambitions, and was never ever going to greenlight the “Hollywood royalty” angle.
Stay strong Charles. I bet the apartment she’s got her gimlet ion is KP Apt. 1, currently an occupied as the prince and princess of Wales are based in Windsor for now, but still Williams official London residence. That dog ain’t going to hunt, Meg.
H&* back in the fold? This is highly doubtful. Maybe they've realised they're getting nowhere and that being in the BRF is a better option. It sounds like one of *'s projects.
I looked at the article in the link you gave and alongside was another article, 'Prince Harry is set for a "future of less and less importance" as chances of him returning to the royal folds continue to dwindle.' Which is it? Back or not? Not, I'd say, and * is on record as saying she wouldn't set foot in the UK again (good). The Queen said not to the half in/half out option, I don't think Charles would go against her wishes and I 'm sure William would have something to say about that. After all it does affect him, not directly but in the future.
What WILL the Netflix-loving Duke and Duchess of Despair say? In The Crown's grand finale, Harry is reduced to a pot-smoking, bitter, hopeless also-ran dressed as a Nazi - as MAUREEN CALLAHAN reveals in her royally acerbic TV verdict
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-12864851/MAUREEN-CALLAHAN-Crown-netflix-finale-review-Prince-Harry-William-Nazi.html
All this back and forth about being 'back in the fold' and dictating 'terms' under which the Sussexes would deign to return to be 'part-time Royalty' for 4 months out of the year, provided she gets a plum apartment in a Palace, yada yada . . couple that with H's grim relentless crusade to get his Royal security detail reinstated--it's all spin by a couple of aggrieved mental toddlers who have not accepted that they are really and truly OUT. No do-overs. They don't get it. This level of unawareness of the permanency of their actions is staggering. Both were raised to believe that there would never be any permanent consequences for their misbehavior as children--if they wheedled and pouted and played the pity card--You can't punish me because my mother died/abandoned me . . and they are still operating like little kids who think they can worm their way back into what they want.
After the Sandringham Summit, I think the Queen left the door cracked open for H to come to his senses. Maybe she thought letting him have a year's holiday to cavort by the pool and meet some movie stars would get his discontent out of his system. Perhaps. Or maybe it ws always an irrevocable ouster. I'd say that hinges upon proveable treasonous tampering with the line of succession had been verified. But it is absolutely incredible that the Snausages still believe that they are valuable commodies in the RF, after the Oprah interview and SPARE. The former, callously aired while Prince Philip was dying was really the cap on it, I think. SPARE is just H looking for another hit of attention, but there were no revelations in it more damaging than those that had already been released. Scabby's book is a layer removed (officially) from the Snausages though it's transparent that Scabby was only taking dictation from them.
Henry just contines to dig himself into a deeper and deeper hole. I think he would be given somewhere to live in the event of a divorce, but he will never again have any sort of official role. He will be like Andrew, only not even invited to Christmas. His life was meaningless before but superficially at least, he was included as a valuable family member, even if the propping up was extreme. Now that's all stripped away and everyone sees what a vapid, petty, vengeful waste of space he and the wife both are.
You’re welcome. The top comment is worth posting—close to 2,000 thumbs up v. 16 down. Interesting screen name and location too:
Truth not treason
Windsor, United Kingdom
11h ago
Are Netflix inflicting revenge on harry for taking their money and doing nothing?
Yuleogy
‘Twas just before Christmas
when the red headed mouse
Told meg that he couldn’t
afford their big house
They’d just been named
biggest loser
Then lost out to a pig
nothing crueller…
Speculation that he'll donate it to charity - any prize for guessing which charity?
Mr Justice Fancourt ruled there had been “extensive” phone hacking at MGN titles between 2006 and 2011, including during the Leveson Inquiry.
The judge found that 15 out of 33 articles focused on during the trial were the product of hacking from the Duke of Sussex’s mobile phone or the product of unlawful information gathering.
He concluded that Harry’s phone was only hacked to a modest extent and this was carefully controlled by certain people at each newspaper – but that this did happen from the end of 2003 to April 2009.
The duke was awarded £140,600 in damages.'
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/prince-harry-hacking-trial-latest-202736735.html
Duke of Sussex.
10. I have found the Duke’s case of voicemail interception and unlawful information gathering proved in part only. I found that 15 out of the 33 articles that were tried were the product of phone hacking of his mobile phone or the mobile phones of his associates, or the product of other unlawful information gathering. I consider that his phone was only hacked to a modest extent, and that this was probably carefully controlled by certain people at each newspaper. However, it did happen on occasions from about the end of 2003 to April 2009 (which was the date of the last article that I examined). There was a tendency for the Duke in his evidence to assume that everything published was the product of voicemail interception because phone hacking was rife within Mirror Group at the time. But phone hacking was not the only journalistic tool at the time, and his claims in relation to the other 18 articles did not stand up to careful analysis.
11. There were also a number of separate invoices, unconnected to published articles, which I consider to be evidence of unlawful gathering of the Duke’s private information.
12. I have accordingly awarded the Duke damages in respect of each of the articles and invoices where unlawful information gathering was proved. I have also awarded a further sum to compensate the Duke fully for the distress that he suffered as a result of the unlawful activity directed at him and those close to him. I recognise that Mirror Group was not responsible for all the unlawful activity that was directed at the Duke, and that a good deal of the oppressive behaviour of the Press towards the Duke over the years was not unlawful at all. Mirror Group therefore only played a small part in everything that the Duke suffered and the award of damages on this ground is therefore modest.
13. I have also awarded a sum for aggravated damages, to reflect the particular hurt and sense of outrage that the Duke feels because two directors of Trinity Mirror plc, to whom the board had delegated day-to-day responsibility for such matters, knew about the illegal activity that was going at their newspapers and could and should have put a stop to it. Instead of doing so, they turned a blind eye to what was going on, and positively concealed it. Had the illegal conduct been stopped, the misuse of the Duke’s private information would have ended much sooner.
14. The total sum that I have awarded the Duke in damages is £140,600.
Interesting discussion here about why the late Queen let the marriage go ahead (not that could have stopped it anyway). I'd add that she took * at her word about being pregnant - after all, she was reported as regarding any mention of pregnancy as distasteful, apparently couldn't even utter the word.
FWIW, I now suspect that the `we-know-something-they-don't' smirk in the wedding wasn't `Ha-ha -I'm already with child' nor was it `... the surrogate's pregnant'. Rather, it was duper's delight - `I've got the fool, he believes I'm pregnant'.
Under those circumstances, she probably would want a grandchild to be a centre of interest for being born out of wedlock - it'd be the |Harry rumours all over again.
The judgement awarded will go towards his attorneys' fees; he won't be pocketing that cash. I'm going to guess that retaining an attorney(s) costs about $10,000/month since the Dook is so litigious.
Only a 140K pound payout? That - is a responding slap. Not the $1M that he was expecting.
Plus he owes from the previous case. Plus the attorneys fees.
The man is in the red on this one.
They are internationally known to be losers big time.
They are internationally seen to be utterly ridiculous without any dignity.
They will expect the family set them up royally (the palace, the clothes, the jewelry, the holidays)
And they are never going to shut up about intimate privacy of Harry's family members.
The Royal family has been there and seen that. What the hell is there for the Windsors?
Gut-wrenching news for the duchess as it is revealed by Netflix that Peppa Pig was more popular than her documentary. And to add insult to injury her collaboration with Mr Scabies, ‘Endgame’, was vastly outsold on its day of release by another book - ‘The Dinosaur that Pooped a Reindeer!’ - described by Amazon UK as ‘a poop-filled adventure’ for children.
The world has had enough of YOUR shit Megsy.
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2023/12/blind-item-12_15.html#disqus_thread
https://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/bacon-three-studies-for-figures-at-the-base-of-a-crucifixion-n06171
https://edition.cnn.com/style/article/francis-bacon/index.html
Stuff to make you shudder.
Thank you so much for sharing the wonderfully snarky (and accurate) comment from CDAN, ending with
“The world has had enough of YOUR shit Megsy.”
Indeed!
It’s hard to wrap my head around, but the constant rictus grin on Megaliar’s face is far more diabolical, terrifying, and nightmare-inducing than anything the masterful Francis Bacon could envision and reveal on canvas.
Harry wins hacking payout in phone-hacking case against Mirror publisher
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67332563
Prince Harry hails phone-hacking case win as ‘great day for truth’
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/15/prince-harry-wins-partial-victory-phone-hacking-case-daily-mirror
Don't they recognise a Pyrrhic victory when they see it?
Martyrs Vineyard-Bin 666
A bad year for
Montecito whine
Sour grapes
still festering on the vine
Stopped production of Tig
As they foment their next gig
A vintage vat of urine
equine…
At the time (about 15 years' ago?), hacking and other dubious means of obtaining personal information for 'gossip rags' was rife.
There was a major inquiry and some were 'punished' (including jail time), and there were major changes to the media that greatly increased protection of privacy.
Hapless dragging up an old story was and is a personal vendetta that is rather childish. Any harm done to him was caused by his character and behaviour, not the tabloids using unlawful means to find and publish personal information about him. In fact, he was a beloved, if not favourite, prince, despite the tabloids revealing his drunk and inappropriate behaviour. It was his marriage to the witch that did him great harm, not unlawful gathering and publishing of information about him.
This 'win' changes nothing in the way the tabloids operate because the changes had already been made, years ago. It is the court case that has done him damage because it has revealed how stupid, vindictive and self serving he is, and it is thus his actions alone that have further damaged him.
“This case is not just about hacking. It is about a systemic practice of unlawful and appalling behavior, followed by clever-ups and destruction of evidence, the shocking scale of which can only be revealed through these proceedings," Harry said in the statement, in part.
“The journey to justice can be a slow and painful one and since bringing my claim almost five years ago defamatory stories and intimidating tactics have been deployed against me and at my family’s expense. And so, as I too have learnt through this process, patience is, in fact, a virtue. Especially, in the face of vendetta journalism," he continued.
“My commitment to seeing this case through is based on my belief in our need — and collective right - to a free and honest press. And one which is properly accountable when necessary. That is what we need in Britain and across the globe. Anything else is poisoning the well for a profession we all depend on.
“The acts listed in the judgment are prime examples of what happens when the power of the press is abused. I respectfully call upon the authorities, the financial regulator, the Stock Market, who were deliberately deceived by Mirror Group, and, indeed, the Metropolitan Police and prosecuting authorities, to do their duty for the British public and to investigate bringing charges against the company and those who have broken the law.
“Today’s ruling is vindicating and affirming. I’ve been told that slaying dragons will get you burned but in light of today’s victory and the importance of doing what is needed for a free and honest press, it is a worthwhile price to pay. The mission continues.”
-----
The grown-up response from the tabloids:
Following Friday's ruling, a spokesperson for Mirror Group Newspapers said in a statement: "We welcome today's judgment that gives the business the necessary clarity to move forward from events that took place many years ago."
"Where historical wrongdoing took place, we apologise unreservedly, have taken full responsibility and paid appropriate compensation," the statement continued.
The statement from Piers Morgan is powerful. One thing he did not say that I think is obvious is that with regard to the media, the duo are intent on controlling the media so that it only publishes the nonsense and untruthful PR about them.
Damages of 140K is a derisory figure.
Harold really found his opposite number, didn't he? All those years, we knew H was a cheeky chappie, irreverent and liked to party. We knew he had questionable taste in Halloween costumes and was not a serious-minded person. But this level of monstrous narcissim and caustic jealousy of his brother only came out after he joined forces with the succubus. Imagine being that captivated by your own image. Sick.
As despicable and pathetic a creature as he now is, he was cute once. I think about Baby Harry at the piano with three-year-old William and I am sad. He had so much potential for a bright future. About 10 years after that photo shoot at KP, Diana died in Paris and H went completely off the rails. But we have learned that he was nasty, selfish bitter little sh*t even when his mother was still alive. He will be a sad and tawdry chapter in the annal of family history. Thank God he was not born to be the heir . . We'd have another King John in the 21st century.
I don't know if I am making sense, but usually the loser in such a court case not only has to pay damages but also the costs for the victor. Not only were the damages awarded much less than the amount claimed, but hapless is going to have to pay legal bills from his own pocket? Ouch!
the Daily Express had a story this week about the hairballs thinking that all of their deals failing was due to the BRF intervening.
I have posted the link above.
I think they're suggesting it means that H wants to destroy the Waleses, given that the red dragon is the emblem of Wales, but someone (ie H) is getting his panties into a twist over historical spats between a Harold, a Henry, and two different Williams,
To clarify:
Harold II of England (a Saxon) killed at Hastings in 1066 in battle with William of Normandy's army. Victor became William I, aka the Conqueror.
William I's son and successor, William II, aka Rufus, was shot, perhaps by one Walter Tyrel, when hunting in the New Forest in 1100. William II was succeeded by his son who became Henry I.
Pity that boy didn't pay more attention in history classes at Eton.
What do Nutties think?
The BRF simply doesn't have the time nor inclination to interfere with any deals the Losers are working on; the BRF has glittering lives to live. The Losers interfere with their own deals, no one needs to help them fail, they're failing all by themselves. Companies that depend on profits do not want to be associated with toxic people, of which the Duke and Duchess of Losers The Losers are ruled by paranoia and delusional thinking.
I hope the above link works. It is a post of the Times article that details every claim that he won and list. It seems that his phone was not hacked but the phones of the people he was communicating with were hacked.
Quickie 🎤
Apologies: Various
I Saw Mommy Kissing Santa Claus
Who Saw Harry Kissing Soho?
Pause…
We saw meggy
with her giant claws
Undermining hazza
left and right
She fell into a Heep
When exposed as
Aliar Cheap
She ought to be all trussed up
In a cell that’s padded deep…
Here is a video by Avid Gardener who has summed up the judgement on all 104 points from Harry’s phone hacking suit. She just gives a sentence for each point’s judgement so the video is easy to watch. Harry only won on 15 points,some a partial one at that, out of the total 104. In listening to her summaries, I noticed there were more points that dealt with the phone hacking of other people which were thrown out,e.g., P William, P Catherine, Chelsy. So Harry was offered £200,000 to initially settle out of court but only won £140,000. The only winners are the lawyers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHxSIHO4FPo
12:48
Also wanted to add that the PR puff pieces continue from Monteshitshow and they are very schizophrenic. Madam is spiraling down the drain
Here is a video by Avid Gardener who has summed up the judgement on all 104 points from Harry’s phone hacking suit. She just gives a sentence for each point’s judgement so the video is easy to watch. Harry only won on 15 points,some a partial one at that, out of the total 104. In listening to her summaries, I noticed there were more points that dealt with the phone hacking of other people which were thrown out,e.g., P William, P Catherine, Chelsy. So Harry was offered £200,000 to initially settle out of court but only won £140,000. The only winners are the lawyers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHxSIHO4FPo
12:48
Also wanted to add that the PR puff pieces continue from Monteshitshow and they are very schizophrenic. Madam is spiraling down the drain
From this, I picked up on one of her Hallmark movies, `When Sparks Fly'- it's here:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3512900/
The clip finishes with her saying, `I guess I was following the wrong dream' (or wtte). How true, how very true.
It will be about books and reading.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-12867539/Queen-Camilla-launching-podcast-encourage-reading-featuring-guests-including-Joanna-Lumley-Ian-Rankin.html
Princess of Wales Kate Middleton and her sister-in-law Meghan Markle both got emotional during conversation as the future queen has finally allegedly apologized to the Duchess of Sussex, it is claimed.
Kate Middleton allegedly reached out to Meghan Markle after the Dutch version of Omid Scobie’s book Endgame sparked royal race row.
According to a report by In Touch Weekly, a royal insider has claimed that following the Endgame allegations, King Charles asked his ‘beloved daughter-in-law' Kate Middleton to contact the California-based royals and ‘clear the air'.
The insider also disclosed details of the conversation, saying, “Their talk was four years in the making, and obviously it wasn’t easy, because who knows what could end up being leaked from their private conversations?”
“But Kate has apologized to Meghan before, and she knew what to say. Her kind words had an impact, and they both got pretty emotional.”
https://www.geo.tv/latest/523371-kate-middleton-gets-emotional-as-she-extends-olive-branch-to-meghan-markle
The In Touch Weekly article ... I wonder who this 'insider source' is? Who would say the following:
... Kate has always taken her duties seriously — she does what she is told.” Even if it means swallowing her pride. Kate, 41, had previously been called out by the Sussexes in an interview for making Meghan, 42, cry before her wedding.
In Spare, Harry alleged that the Princess of Wales “grimaced” when Meghan asked to borrow her lip gloss and snapped at her sister-in-law for daring to mention her pregnancy hormones.
He even suggested Kate was “on edge” about being compared to and competing with Meghan. And in Endgame, Kate is accused of being “cold” toward Meghan and of “shivering” when her sister-in-law’s name is mentioned
... But Kate made the call anyway. “Their talk was four years in the making, and obviously it wasn’t easy, because who knows what could end up being leaked from their private conversations?” the insider notes. “But Kate has apologized to Meghan before, and she knew what to say. Her kind words had an impact, and they both got pretty emotional.”
They agreed to a reluctant truce. “They’ll never truly see eye-to-eye, and nothing will change how Meghan feels about the way she has been treated by Kate and the rest of the royals, but Meghan is estranged from her own father, so she knows how tough it’s been on Harry to feel abandoned by his family,” says the insider. “She’s vowed to do what she can to help. Both she and Kate want to start over.”
An excellent post that details how bad 2023 was for them, especially her.
Notice this part:
... obviously it wasn’t easy, because who knows what could end up being leaked from their private conversations?” ... . Um, I doubt that Catherine has a habit of choosing to leak information of any kind knowing what I have read about her husband and his alleged feelings about trust. But I could be wrong, you know.
But this is the really interesting part which caught my eye.
... They agreed to a reluctant truce. ... and nothing will change how Meghan feels about the way she has been treated by Kate and the rest of the royals ..."
So here we read that an apology is (allegedly finally) directly (no less) given but yet * is choosing to hold onto her grievances, anger instead of looking like the gracious one to accept this alleged apology.
Points to Catherine (not that I think there is truth in it but for the appearance of how she does always come off as the do the right thing kind of person).
I agree, totally insane.
100% fantasy/Meghan's Truth.
Or was Duchess Loser pulling stuff out of her a$$?
LOL! The delusional is deep and wide.
Is Tyler Perry going to be markled?
There are some rumours that he's about to be exposed as a serial sexual harasser of young men.
I can believe that Catherine tried to smooth things over after the bridesmaids dresses fracas by going to NottCott with flowers— only to have the door slammed in her face. So who is really the “cold“ one here? I think we all know our answer to that. Considering how Catherine had to Indore years of a snide remarks about being wisteria from Williams Aristo Circle, including the princesses of York, there would’ve been no one more sympathetic to an outsider joining the family then she would have been, had Harry’s fiancé been remotely grateful, appropriate and decorous when she arrived. This ridiculous fixation on lip gloss and shopping tells me that Harry’s wife really doesn’t have anything more specific to point to as an example of Catherine’s snobbish cruelty and coldness toward her. As for “shuddering” when Methane’s name is mentioned, I imagine that’s an involuntary response made by everyone in the family when that happens, But more to the point who would be the source of this report to Montecito ears? It’s not like scabby was in the habit of taking tea with the Waleses.
If this is how Methane proposes to take Catherine down, that’s very weak ammunition. Catherine simply did not give her anything else to work with. So the big guns had to be brought out, and the big lie: Catherine is a racist. Nobody is buying that whatsoever.
I can believe that Catherine tried to smooth things over after the bridesmaids dresses fracas by going to NottCott with flowers— only to have the door slammed in her face. So who is really the “cold“ one here? I think we all know our answer to that. Considering how Catherine had to Indore years of a snide remarks about being wisteria from Williams Aristo Circle, including the princesses of York, there would’ve been no one more sympathetic to an outsider joining the family then she would have been, had Harry’s fiancé been remotely grateful, appropriate and decorous when she arrived. This ridiculous fixation on lip gloss and shopping tells me that Harry’s wife really doesn’t have anything more specific to point to as an example of Catherine’s snobbish cruelty and coldness toward her. As for “shuddering” when Methane’s name is mentioned, I imagine that’s an involuntary response made by everyone in the family when that happens, But more to the point who would be the source of this report to Montecito ears? It’s not like scabby was in the habit of taking tea with the Waleses.
If this is how Methane proposes to take Catherine down, that’s very weak ammunition. Catherine simply did not give her anything else to work with. So the big guns had to be brought out, and the big lie: Catherine is a racist. Nobody is buying that whatsoever.
I can believe that Catherine tried to smooth things over after the bridesmaids dresses fracas by going to NottCott with flowers— only to have the door slammed in her face. So who is really the “cold“ one here? I think we all know our answer to that. Considering how Catherine had to Indore years of a snide remarks about being wisteria from Williams Aristo Circle, including the princesses of York, there would’ve been no one more sympathetic to an outsider joining the family then she would have been, had Harry’s fiancé been remotely grateful, appropriate and decorous when she arrived. This ridiculous fixation on lip gloss and shopping tells me that Harry’s wife really doesn’t have anything more specific to point to as an example of Catherine’s snobbish cruelty and coldness toward her. As for “shuddering” when Methane’s name is mentioned, I imagine that’s an involuntary response made by everyone in the family when that happens, But more to the point who would be the source of this report to Montecito ears? It’s not like scabby was in the habit of taking tea with the Waleses.
If this is how Methane proposes to take Catherine down, that’s very weak ammunition. Catherine simply did not give her anything else to work with. So the big guns had to be brought out, and the big lie: Catherine is a racist. Nobody is buying that whatsoever.
Like @abby, I was struck by 'nothing will change how Meghan feels about the way' etc. This only shows that * holds grudges for life and is not interested in harmony and unity.
(Multiple thumbs up to Hikari for her rousing take on this latest indication of insanity from Montecito.) This would be so amusing if it were in some dumb tv soap. As it is real, it's pathetic and sad.
I've come to believe that there are real children involved in this mess, however they were brought into being. I feel so sorry for those innocent young lives. What malign, vicious & stupid people their parents are.
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/bbc-facing-criminal-investigation-over-200501694.html
BBC facing criminal investigation over claims it withheld Diana interview documents
Blathnaid Corless
Sun, 17 December 2023 at 8:05 pm GMT
`The BBC is facing a criminal investigation over claims it withheld documents relating to Martin Bashir’s 1995 interview with Diana, the Princess of Wales.
The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) said its criminal investigations team is reviewing a complaint that the corporation breached the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
The BBC could face an unlimited fine if it were successfully prosecuted.
Last week, a judge strongly criticised the BBC for failing to release a large number of emails relating to the way Mr Bashir secured the Panorama interview, in which the Princess famously said “there were three of us in this marriage”, referring to Charles’s then-mistress Camilla.
The emails had been requested by a journalist who claims the corporation breached the Freedom of Information Act, allegations which are rejected by the BBC.
Mr Bashir officially stepped down from his job at the BBC in 2021, after it emerged he had secured the Panorama interview through deception and by faking documents.
Journalist Andy Webb made a freedom of information request, asking to see the emails BBC bosses sent each other about Mr Bashir over a two-month period in 2020.
The corporation sent him a 67-page dossier of memos and minutes from 1995 and 1996 that detailed its internal investigation into Mr Bashir’s methods.
However, it withheld more than 3,000 emails, saying Mr Bashir was “seriously unwell” and it was unable to “discuss this matter with him”.
Earlier this month, Judge Brian Kennedy ordered the BBC to release more emails - saying the corporation had been “inconsistent, erroneous and unreliable” in the way it dealt with the initial request.
A spokesperson for the ICO confirmed Mr Webb’s case has since been referred to its criminal investigations team, “who are currently reviewing the material provided”.
The BBC said it rejected “these allegations entirely, including any suggestion that the BBC has acted unlawfully”.
A spokesperson for the corporation said: “We have repeatedly set out to Mr Webb that Martin Bashir’s significant health issues prevented us from disclosing documentation in 2020, as we were unable to consult him on the substantive issues.
“As Mr Webb also knows, all relevant documentation that was in the BBC’s possession was passed to the Lord Dyson inquiry which concluded and was published in 2021.”
Mr Webb previously said it was “overwhelmingly in the public interest for these internal emails to be divulged to the public”.
The inquiry found that Mr Bashir used deception to secure the interview and then lied to BBC managers.'
Whether you laugh or despair at the intellect of its readership is up to you!
Link to Full Telegraph article by Hannah Furness, asking `Can they really come back?' (I note that US reader can get cheaper access to online Telegraph than I could - I had to pay £8 a month. I don't any more)
I had a look at the website and it has indeed a laughable section called 'Serving the Monarchy'. Those two do not serve the monarchy, they are just self-serving. The worst was when I came across a photo of the Queen and her pledge to serve the Monarchy, “I declare before you all that my whole life, whether it be long or short, shall be devoted to your service and the service of our great imperial family to which we all belong.” I was very upset to see the Queen's photo and her pledge, knowing what we know about H&*. How could they have the gall to publish this on their website? BP should shut it down.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12864407/Harry-Meghan-Sussex-Royal-website-Queen.html
Those cover pages have opened my eyes to a wealth of amazing hard-hitting journalism /s
My favorite is “WORLD WAR 2 BOMBER FOUND ON MOON”
Of all the tantalizing stories, I didn’t see any coverage whatsoever of Haznoballs and Megaliar, indicating to me that the noisome twosome are too boring, distasteful and radioactive for even Sunday Sport’s readership.
I agree. What a scoop!
Theresa Longo Fans
@BarkJack_
Exclusive - WME exec arranges meeting with 2 significant Hollywood Packaging Agents.
WME ponders aloud "What DOES she offer her fanbase"? No one answers.
Agent 1 isn't convinced. "Respect has to come first"
Hollywood is not convinced *yet*. Ouch!
Politics is the next pusher.
4:02 AM · Sep 21, 2023
-----
Theresa Longo Fans
@BarkJack_
REVENGE by Tom Bower is commendable, laudable, praiseworthy (at times) of MM's tenacity, audacity and insatiable drive for fame and infamy, backed by little talent.
4:24 PM · Jul 21, 2022
-----
Theresa Longo Fans
@BarkJack_
Her goal is infamy. It's her high. Positive or negative opinion, doesn't matter. Checks socials daily.
She knows (& has known) they cannot compete with top Hollywood talent. We exclusively reported @barkjack in 2021 her political aspirations and I'm told plans have not changed!
10:09 PM · Dec 10, 2022
-----
Theresa Longo Fans
@BarkJack_
·
Sep 21
Its tragically apparent. Hollywood knows it.
They cannot force what isn't there. Heck, one can be beautiful or an OK actor. But there's a certain talent, willingness and appeal that is SO sought after. If it's not there the DOOR is CLOSED. & That's it!
-----
Theresa Longo Fans
@BarkJack_
·
Sep 21
It's a dying practice but STILL happens, in ways. Perhaps not on the grandiose scale it once was. (My comment: re. a Hollywood Packaging Agent)
-link to article in DE, featuring an obscure (in the Uk that is - she's an Aussie) political commentator called Krakue. Too much of a pain to put the bits together to copy.
Anyone ready for predictions for next year (plausible, crazy, or anything in between)? I'll post mine as I think of them if you don't mind.
* He will lose his bid for taxpayer-funded RPOs 24/7. She will use flying monkeys to make spiteful personal digs at his family; he will publicly throw a tantrum.
-----
I'll post the actual quote (from a book) when I find it ... it is about her relationship with Trevor. In private, she was volatile, threw tantrums, and was relentless in demanding that he make her a Hollywood star.
Sadly, I think we are in for more of same in 2024 as we've been enduring for the last 4 years. Intermittent spurious attacks on members of the Royal family interspersed with bloviating statements about 'forthcoming plans' that never happen and more parking lot pap strolls. H will file more vexatious lawsuits. Meanwhile the Palace will to all appearances keep calm and carry on, ignoring all. I don't think KC mentioned the Montecito rotten branch during last year's Christmas message, to my recollection. They haven't gotten an official mention since September 2022. I expect that non-acknowledgement to continue. Basically both camps will carry on as they have been. Lady C's cryptic reference to 'spring' bringing some big changes might relate to the lifting of the superinjunction about 'the children' or an announcement that Parliament has voted to revoke the titles. I can't think what else it might be.
There will be no divorce next year as H comes into the rest of his inheritance at 40. Maybe in 2025 they will finally split but until then I do not expect their behavior to change one iota, except to escalate. But in substance, it will be same-old, same-old.
**************
If she had a complete hysterectomy while married to Trevor, I wonder when exactly that happened. Was it right after she made him sign an elaborate contract to pay her huge sums and support her in luxury, including plastic surgery in exchange for her going through pregnancy? Knowing that he wanted children, it would totally be in her Narc wheelhouse to 'agree' to have a baby, with conditions, and then burst the prospective father's happiness with the announcement that she'd made sure she would never have children and there was nothing he could do about it.
She makes my blood run cold and I've never had to even be in her presence. The trail of broken hearts and lives she leaves behind her won't stop as long as she lives. She's in for quite a reckoning though, and it will come for her one day.
Massaging the Nostradamus predictions to make hapless king is absurd, but people have been doing it for years now.
These predictions were made in the first part of the 16th century, so you have to interpret his predictions in terms of the world of the 16th century. Nostradamus would not understand the concept of a democratically, limited term ruler, so any ruler would be described by him as a king.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nostradamus
Wikipedia has a very good article that debunks modern interpretations of Nostradamus. Translations are inaccurate (none of these modern commentators understand 16th century French nor the history of the time), and his predictions can only be understood and evaluated from a 16th century perspective.
Hapless is not going to be king of the UK. It is highly unlikely that Charles will abdicate as he is actually very fit and healthy for his age. William has three children ...
I wonder if the dastardly duo will be convinced by this stupidity and start dreaming of the throne for themselves?
Shaun Attwood spoke to enty lawyer, from CDAN. The full video will be released in about a day. I doubt that he will have any new solid information, but I think his assessment of her and what her likely future is is quite solid. He knows the type!
I didn't hear Lady C's speech, so maybe it's going to be more shots over the bow of the Harkle's sinking ship.
Yes, specifically Beatrice, who resembles her late great-great grandmother Victoria. Diana’s boys were both young but it’s a wonder the friendship with Fergie survived the implicit suggestion that William and Harry weren’t going to survive childhood.
Fergie, bless her heart, always afflicted with verbal incontinence. I don’t think of her as malicious, just not very bright and in capable of keeping her yap shut.
That psychic isn’t in any danger of being proven correct, but it made for a good laugh at the time. Once upon a less soft time, even voicing such a thing aloud would have been viewed as sedition for presuming harm upon the person(s) of the heirs to the Crown.
Spot her in each scene of the Clevrblends ad!
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/18mebyq/hmmm_i_think_this_cryptic_blind_item_today_is/
Enty claims that they have lost their 'imaginary backers' so media is no longer afraid to reprint stories from foreign tabloids that may be negative.
-----
I did a 2024 tarot reading for her and for him. I'll type up the detailed readings, just for interest, after sleep time. In general: I do keep seeing her having a successful project. The reading may have a clue about what it is. But, she ends up sabotaging herself ... clues in the details of how she does this. His year is not so good, not all bad, but some rough spots. Cards clearly show that he is completely dominated by her even though he tries to 'take the reins to steer his way forward'. I also looked at their marriage/family. The cards do not tell a straightforward story ... in fact they are quite confusing because they do indicate that maybe all is not what it seems.
has anyone here seen this new photo? I can't seem to find it.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/18mi4ge/public_service_announcement_dont_get_markled_by_a/
Also this:
https://www.instagram.com/reel/C1DOz8VvGe-/?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA%3D%3D
- a reminder that we're all just uncredited walk-on extras on other peoples' lives { truthful wtte painted on a musical artist's van seen on Hayling Island. Some of us don't get it though)
I don't recall seeing this photoshopped effort before - and what has she got on her forearm - a transfer of ERII?
Yes. I do remember seeing a photo of * with a dark blond child, I think it's one of those stories they have in DM after an article. I tried to have a quick look but couldn't see much and cour be bothered to see what the story was about. I presume the child was Archie (it looked like a boy). I'll check later if I can find the story. Probably nothing very credible, I think.
How credible do you think this is? Wasn't Hannah Waddingham involved with the Earthshot Prize awards, or am I confusing her with someone else? Would she give such a long and detailed description of how dreadful the wife was to work with on Suits? Here is a sample of what Hannah supposedly said:
She was candid about her astonishment at Meghan's behavior, describing her as rude and arrogant. According to Waddingham, Meghan exhibited diva-like behavior and treated everyone with a sense of contempt and disdain. In her own words, Meghan's demeanor was "horrible, absolutely horrible." Waddingham further elaborated that Meghan came across as snooty and snobbish, appearing to look down on everyone, despite her status as a supporting character on the show.
Thank you
Shannen Doherty Exposes Meghan Markle's Jealousy and Alleged Plot to Have Her Fired from Charmed
Docky disclosed that her relationship with co-star Holly Marie Combs, who portrayed Piper Hallowell, was generally positive. However, she encountered significant tension and conflict when it came to Milano. It was only later that Docky discovered Megan's secret alliance with Milano. Megan had made a guest appearance on the show in its second season, playing the character Amy Madison, a friend of Phoebe and a rival of PR.
Docky alleged that Megan had harbored a crush on Milano and aspired to become her closest confidante, potentially even taking over the lead role on the show. According to Docky, Megan and Milano orchestrated a campaign of spreading rumors and falsehoods about her to the producers, network, and the media. They accused her of being difficult, unprofessional, and demanding, all while attempting to turn both fans and fellow cast members against her. They also sought to undermine her on-screen performances and disrupt her scenes.
----------------
for Docky, replace with Shannon Doherty (don't ask me why)
so it turns out that * is trying to paint other people as she is herself - bullying, difficult, etc.
Oh dear. She is no longer considered a royal and thus has lost the protection that 'being royal' gave her. I find these stories believable. A lot of men will put up with that kind of drama and bitchiness from a woman in a relationship, and for those working in Hollywood, I suppose people are wary of making enemies so there are a lot of fake friendships and being nice about people you work with even if you dislike them intensely.
-----
https://archive.ph/2023.12.20-140851/https://pagesix.com/2023/12/20/royal-family/meghan-markle-makes-surprise-coffee-ad-cameo-as-slightly-nerdy-intern/
An article about the Clevr Blends ad. Yes, it is bad. To me, it comes across as unprofessional and the ad does not feature the product at all, nor tell you anything about it. Why would watching TBW giving a cringeworthy performance in an amateur ad in what looks like a backyard office and warehouse make you want to buy the product?
https://archive.ph/2023.12.20-124815/https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/meghan-markle-prince-harry-clevr-coffee-cameo-b1128232.html
And another article that starts with ...
"The miracle of the latest advertisement for Clevr, a “mission-driven, women-led wellness brand” which sells revolting-sounding powdered coffee, is that it features Meghan Markle doing actual work. ..."
The article is all about their comeback, the huge deals they are being offered ...
But it looks like 2024 is already off to a better start. In mid-December, Harry saw a landmark victory in one of his phone hacking lawsuits against a group of British newspapers (he was awarded $180,000). Sources tell Us lucrative offers have been flooding in for him and his wife and that, despite being tested, their marriage is stronger than ever.
“Harry and Meghan are in extremely high demand,” says one source, noting that the duo are being courted for speaking engagements, business collaborations and entertainment gigs. They’re also thinking of moving from Montecito, California, to L.A. to get closer to the action in Hollywood. Adds a second source: “Harry and Meghan think 2024 will be the year of redemption.”
It’s an exciting time for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. According to the second source, Meghan’s team has been turning down offers left and right. “They’ve actually been shocked by how popular she is,” says the source. “Her team has never seen anything like it.” She has a few projects pending, and the source says the Suits alum may also be working on a “big media deal.” ...
You thanked me too soon! I just can't find the photo. It wasn't in one of the regulars articles. The child didn't look like Archie at all so I'm not sure it's of any interest. I'll keep looking just in case.
https://desistarsgilrsfunclub.blogspot.com/2023/12/shannen-doherty-exposes-meghan-markles.html
From another post at the Celebrity website that Girl with a Hat shared:
Many locals in Montecito, who are likely wealthier than Meghan, are relieved that they won't have to encounter her. Some have even commented that Meghan is merely a social-climbing D-list actress, and they don't believe she and Harry have any children at all.
The gloves are coming off from every direction!
This is not the photo I saw but here is a link showing photos of Archie and Lily - allegedly - some of which I'd ever seen before. I don't think the photo I saw will reappear.
https://www.thedecorideas.com/harry-and-meghan-finally-shares-photos-of-their-kids-be-the-first-to-see/?utm_source=News&utm_medium=outbrain&utm_campaign=008edd34c3194a979cdbae9a2b7a58cf39&utm_content=MailOnline+%28DMG+Media%29&utm_term=009d7c521214d10d08ece3c201385ddd4e&itm_term=tdiios&dicbo=v4-IZB4CNd-1080653553
I don't think I believe that.
https://desistarsgilrsfunclub.blogspot.com/2023/12/us-government-revokes-prince-harrys.html
Perseverance paid off! The photo is of a little boy (unknown), so far not what we have seen of the child called Archie. Below the photo it says '14 photos of Harry and Meghan's children'. If you click on it you'll get the slideshow the link to which I pasted in my previous post.
I don't know who the child is and what relevance he has to the above mentioned 14 photos. I'm not sure this is the photo you are after - I thought it was * and a child I saw, not a child on his own.
https://images.outbrainimg.com/transform/v3/eyJpdSI6IjhhNzVmZGM5NzdiNmEwMDIwN2NkMzlhZDM0ZTViYTY5NGI2OTRkNTBmM2YwMzNhNjk2NTQwNDg1ZTk0ZmJiOWIiLCJ3Ijo0MDAsImgiOjI2NiwiZCI6MS4wLCJjcyI6MCwiZiI6NH0.webp
Thank you