Well, what do you think of the shot over the bow by Vanity Fair?
https://www.vanityfair.com/style/story/prince-harry-meghan-markle-cover-story-2025
One doesn't expect them to be "wild" about this story. And it is from the locals who perhaps really want to send a message to the couple about how their neighbors are viewed in a not positive light. Apparently unsigned notes are not dropped in the mailbox in that neighborhood any more (maybe Ring is a fear). I have not read it yet (apparently I now need a subscription) but perhaps the library has it.
However, the DM has some parts of it. And they dish.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-14297853/Meghan-Markle-Harry-caregiver-reparenting-Montecito-claims-new-article.html
The DM has also had some prior articles clearly criticizing them in the showing up to hug and so on as the fires rage. Trauma Tourists and similar labels are being tossed in their directions. It wasn't like this (so public) at Uvalde that I remember. But I could be wrong.
What is interesting is that the articles are sticking more to them like oobleck. The articles start off with fresh news but now is starting to list all the other problematic history. This (trailing history as part of the print story) is becoming more and more of a trend.
So that's kind of new. Don't think it is "the" kraken but it comes off as a shift in the tide.
As a side note, think about what is a tourist (someone looking at something novel to their daily life, not at work, and possible on vacation or retired - not a steady job stopping their visit ... and transient - meaning not going to be there next week, next month or a year from now).
Hugs are nice but they do not put a roof over a family's head. Nor does it put food on their table. Or clothes on their back. Today. Tomorrow. Next week or even next month let alone a year from now. Make up is a nice thought but what if the kid hasn't eaten since yesterday? The sad me reads: the hotels and landlords are gouging families who are just trying to survive.
The cynical side notes that: the difference between real people trying to help and those who are cosplaying are that cosplayers show up with their camera. Apparently if there is not photo, there is no proof.
What is real help to these people in need?
Comments
This blog may or may not be the blog you are looking for. If not, we wish you well and hope you find what you are looking for.
Guidelines for this blog is as follows:
-Keep discussions on the Sussexes. Politics must be strictly related to their involvement. Off topic subjects are permissible but should be limited and are subject to the discretion of Mods.
-Be civil and courteous in discussions.
-Posters who are disruptive will not have their posts posted.
-Anonymous or unknown posts are not allowed.
-We know that some of this is not family friendly. It can be a fine line sometimes on the topics such as sex and sexuality. Try to lean towards family friendly (thanks).
-Profanity has not traditionally been a problem, so let's keep it that way.
-We never encourage vindictive or other harmful actions.
-Please try to keep the conspiracy theories down.
-Do not discuss the blog, blog history, or other posters.
-No personal attacks both direct and indirect.
-Please de-escalate "fights" by dropping the subject. (please drop us a message that someone is treading on your last nerve so we can be aware that this is a problem).
-Please remember that the focus of the blog is on others, not any individuals posting here. So if your name is not attached to something posted, please begin with the idea that what is written is not likely to be directed at you if it upsets you.
-Posts which may be deemed too many flat statements/too provocative or mean spirited may not posted on the blog.
-Remember that not every one who reads the posts is happy about what is posted here. Please do not give out personal information. Be safe.
-Your privacy matters.
-Remember that certain sites require prior approval for reuse such as Harry Markle. Please respect their request on how to handle it. Links to share is a great alternative.
Mods do their best to ensure the guidelines are met. However, lapses happen because moderating this blog is a 24/7 responsibility and we all have jobs and families (and laundry) to care for. If you see overlooked issues, please feel free to message us so we can address them.
Thank you again for all your patience and support.
Moderation on.
PhantasMadoria
Her eyes lit with burning embers
Megiana made sure haz remembers
Things that didn’t happen
were never said
Spectral speculation
disturbing the dead
All this con-jecture
best left in the past
But possession by smegma
ensured Di was cast…
'Several people underwent "long term therapy" or took extended breaks from work after working with the Duchess of Sussex on her podcast, Vanity Fair has claimed. The magazine recounts a source alleging that the strain Meghan put on her colleagues when things went wrong was "really, really, really awful" and "very painful". The allegations are contained in a lengthy profile of the Duke and Duchess marking the fifth anniversary of their departure from the UK.'
This is on the front page and is developed on page 3. Apparently, H is 'conveyed as a naïve, lonely figure who has failed to make any friends and is desperate to reconnect with his family'. . . . 'The Duke is said to have said: "I have very bad childhood trauma. Obviously. My mother was essentially murdered. What is it about me that didn't make me one of these bad guys?" '. . . Still playing the victim and convinced his mother was murdered. It would be interesting to hear William 's take on this.
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2025/01/blind-items-revealed-1_17.html#disqus_thread
- mentions the paparazzi chase in 2023 - probably the NYC alleged chase in 3 mph traffic, but no mention of the city, or the circumstances and the author uses this incident to bolster Hairy's claim for security while in the UK
- includes Hairy's refusal to attend the wedding of the Duke of Westminster for reasons of security in the narrative. I'm not even sure that Hairy was invited and that if he were, that an awkward reunion with William, his brother, wasn't the real reason for the refusal
- mixes Hairy's accusation towards Camilla's and other courtiers of planting unfavourable stories about him with Hairy's suit against the Daily Mail for stories about him about pushing for adding security. I haven't really conveyed very well how the author uses both of these allegations to try to make Hairy's case more valid but it's more obvious when reading the VF article
This is just an analysis of approximately 5-10 paragraphs of the said article. I find this author very manipulative in trying to frame the entire situation differently than what we already know it is.
Lady C & Dan Wootton claim that Radar Online has effectively challenged the 'Orrible Couple to prove that the children are rightfully in line.
Will the supposed parents sue or say nothing?
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/1i51gvw/harry_meghans_archie_lili_surrogacy_issue_finally/
Lady C and Danny Wooton video - Meghan and Harry's surrogacy scandal must be addressed
Binfire of the Vanities
The original tale of
Vanity Fair
Featured Becky Sharp
a gold digging mare
There’s nothing fair
about mevains vanity
A modern day version
Meggy Sharpie…
@GWAH
God save the King
Harsh words from Lady C
Regarding progeny
Poor old Archie
whoever he may be
Time to expose
Di-version and her clown
All that matters
protecting the Crown…
Discurtstyous
Hollywood has turned
Megs has been burned
Hopes for QVC
calls not returned
Here’s a tip
when you’re causing a scene
Never, Ever, disrespect
our late Queen…
"If he (Trump) kicks that piece of shit(Hairy) out of the country I will personally load up some pack mules with chisels and dynamite and add his face to Mount Rushmore."
He said he'd rather be `ordinary' , though I can't think that he'd really have liked that.
.Ady C sounds quite sure and she is normally very guarded in what she says. First I've heard about a 'post Harry divorce book'. Have I missed anything or does anyone know more about it?
https://youtu.be/MJPmQfNJgSY?feature=shared
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cd9qqj3gvv1t
Imagine you're married and find out that your spouse is shopping around for the best deal regarding a book on your divorce, which hasn't even happened yet
Re. The “post-divorce manifesto”.. it’s being trotted out as a “new” venture, when, according to Inside Edition on US TV, this proposal was floated “several years ago”, when someone representing MM contacted publishers re. Interest in such a project. Nothing came of it because there was no divorce. I think this would’ve been early on in their post-Megxit attempt to be moguls of all media. I believe the Duckarse still owes Penguin at least one book of their multi-volume deal. No doubt she used the threat of a tell-all following a divorce to torment Harry and bilk more money out of Charles. It would surprise absolutely nobody who knows the score with these couple of asshats that they would get divorced. Indeed, we here are befuddled that it’s. Taking so long to happen. I was sure she would split after 3 years.
The newly installed POTUS has a keen interest in the visa status of JCMHFKAP. He liked Her late Majesty very much; he probably regards KCIII less warmly but maybe out of respect for Chas’s mother, the visa matter can be dealt with in a private conversation instead of a public humiliation.
I have a feeling this is going to be an interesting year.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OiRbDiMZHjE
Sounds about right to me - but I hadn't realised he's got yet another case in the pipeline for next year. Added to which he's badgering the police (the Met) to investigate alleged criminal aspects of Press behaviour.
Will he never belt up and go away?
This is a `style' that has long turned mu stomach whenever I see it.
https://uk.yahoo.com/style/real-reason-harry-dropped-fight-190508076.html
Quidaitch
The dragon slayer
law court purveyor
Lives his life to pur-sue
If you don’t agree
with his hypocrisy
It’s easy money
to demand a fee
The Sun will still shine
despite the hue
Litigious lamebrain
sold his soul for a sou…
Apologies: Frank Sinatra
The Lady Is a Tramp
Tramp-ho-mien
She’s too hungry
nothing will sate
She loves the drama
all full of hate
She never bothers with people
can’t relate
That’s why meh is a tramp
She likes the free cash
handed by spare
a life unaware
She’s broke and woke
Loves California
her old boat ramp
That’s why the laidly is a tramp…
@GWAH & @Maneki
Thank you X
Hairy was photographed beside some firefighters in San Diego, California. No ball and chain with him. Not much publicity either.
Is this a lesson learned or should he have not done this public appearance at all?
I'm leaning towards they have learned but they still want to keep their foot in the door to keep doing them, once the furore of this latest publicity crisis has passed.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14323493/Prince-Harrys-Mail-excessive-judges-rule.html
A legal battle brought by Prince Harry, Baroness Lawrence and others against the Mail is costing a ‘manifestly excessive’ amount of money, two judges ruled yesterday.
They said the estimated £38.8 million case costs were ‘outside the range of reasonable’.
38.8 million !!
"Meghan Markle earned a not-so-sweet nickname during her time with Spotify."
"Ex-staff members have revealed they decided to christen her ‘Eva’ and this was used as a warning signal to let people know that she was either arriving or on the warpath,"
"The nickname came from the 1955 camp classic ‘Queen Bee’ starring – Joan Crawford… This is because, like the Joan character [Eva Phillips], she stung her victims to pieces. This is exactly how staff felt about working alongside [Meghan]."
"As well as describing working for Meghan and Harry as being like "working with teenagers" in a brutal three-word verdict, Cohen said that during the couple's first tour to Australia, Fiji, Tonga and New Zealand, she ended up being "screamed at".
- - - - - -
'Eva' - 'she stung her victims to pieces.' But apart from that, * is charming, warm, [em]pathetic, and a fabulous employer.
'I spent years representing clients in court (not trial advocacy though) and have seen how unpredictable trials can be. I’m pretty sure Harry’s barrister was worried that his client would undo himself under cross-examination. Justice Fancourt had already made some tart comments about Harry’s evidence in interim hearings. Of course Harry didn’t come away empty handed but to The Sun’s lawyers, settling for some damages/apologies is all in a day’s work and nothing personal, whereas Harry had an axe to grind. Even if you know the game, cross-examination is hugely stressful and a good barrister is masterful at trapping a witness. It’s actually fascinating to watch. Harry is not too bright and is used to deference. Just the kind who might lose the plot under pressure. People who think he won outright simply don’t understand litigation.'
A very good point and I think a good barrister would make mincemeat of H during cross examination.
hmbroyaled
La Barbecue’s markled
Their pork’s been pulled
Salad’s slawed
Insurance fraud
Spares ribs over sauced
therein lies the rub
Don’t photo the Corn
when scrounging for grub…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70XXxB5z13I
Very interesting look at the timing of her epidural story during the delivery of Archibucks.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-14323257/meghan-markle-lindsay-jill-roth-book-prince-harry.html
I had not thought of it but read the part about how does your family resolve conflict and that then Prince Charles was not warm and welcoming when told of the upcoming autobiography.
I'm kind of hard pressed to think who would realistically think that having just trashed these people (BRF) that any of them would feel and act all warm and friendly towards the people who criticized them in print. And, knowing they cannot say anything in response to try to set the record straight.
Or the reasons why she was not allowed to join them while QE was about to pass. Just because you don't agree with them, doesn't make them wrong or unreasonable. It is only that you don't like them or want them changed to your liking.
Or the claim that there is/was no class for her to learn how to follow the protocols. There isn't a class like Royal British History 101, Silverware 202 or Curtsy 325 but they offered all kinds of people to try to help her adjust but she didn't take to them or use them for their knowledge. They tried to help both of them succeed.
A lot of families support their adult children financially.
I still think that his father was trying to gently remind him that sooner or later he would be king and at that point, the duo would lose the financial support from the Duchy as it would now all legally (entailed) to the new POW and his family. We will never know the words used or how far his father was able to speak this information when dropping this bad news but generally speaking, that's a tough conversation to give and to hear. No one wants to hear the money faucet is going to be dry but it needed to be said so expectations could be adjusted long before it actually happened.
Notice that this is about his family but yet he married into hers. Wonder how an article about how she would answer the questions would roll?
@GWAH
I was referring to a DM article a couple
of days ago, our fatuous foodies visited
a Texan restaurant, La Barbecue, last March
Owner/chef is accused of $350,000 fraud scheme 🔥
Vexatious Lil’cant
When the hand that was bitten
no longer fed you
You took to the courts
anything to sue
Still desperate for dollars
more hullabaloo
You’re life now exists in a
puddle of poo…
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-14333069/Meghan-Markle-delays-podcast-Archetypes-netflix-cookery-show.html
I thought the Archetypes podcast was finished and done for.
`King Charles Is Considering Giving Kate Middleton Royal Power Worth Billions That Hasn't Been Granted in 115 Years'
at https://uk.yahoo.com/news/king-charles-considering-giving-kate-132700534.html
It's from Cosmo - Royal Warrants stimulate trade and bring in money to the national economy - not to the pockets of Royals.
The Heritage Foundation has reopened its case to have the duke's immigration papers released.
The American think tank has raised questions about how he was able to gain entry to the US in 2020 with his wife Meghan having admitted in his 2023 book Spare to taking cocaine, marijuana and psychedelic mushrooms.
Heritage has made accusations Harry had either lied on his papers about his drug use or has been given special treatment by the Joe Biden administration in order to emigrate to the country.
Lawyers for the think tank and Harry have now been ordered by Judge Carl J Nichols to meet at a federal court in Washington DC next Wednesday, February 5, according to a ruling seen by Newsweek.
. . . . .
This could be interesting. If this goes against Harry, I wonder if he'll sue (if he can).
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14334543/Prince-Harry-visa-drugs-lawsuit-court-hearing-Donald-Trump.html
`This isn't GB where daddy controls the justices'.
Strange how some people still believe that the our Monarch has powers like POTUS. To paraphrase what we are frequently told from the western side of the Atlantic - we fought a war in the 17th century to put an end to this sort of thing.
Charles I lost his head; his sons provoked anger at their Interference in the in the judiciary :
`... in 1668 the system of appointments “during pleasure” was reintroduced, and in the last 11 years of his reign Charles II sacked 11 of his judges. The next king, Charles’s brother, James II, sacked 12 in just 3 years.
This was bound to affect the quality and independence of the judiciary; judges knew very well their jobs were at risk if the sovereign did not like their judgments...'
(at https://www.judiciary.uk/about-the-judiciary/history-of-the-judiciary-in-england-and-wales/history-of-the-judiciary/)
The Bill of Rights (1688) limited the power of the monarch but the complete separation took much longer:
`...Additionally, until 2006, the Lord Chancellor was part of the government, Parliament, and the judiciary. The Lord Chancellor’s role changed drastically on 3 April 2006 as a result of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005. This major change has been described as the most significant to affect the justice system since Magna Carta. The Act establishes the Lord Chief Justice as President of the Courts of England and Wales and Head of its Judiciary, a role that from 1873 had been performed by the Lord Chancellor. For the first time an express statutory duty was placed on the Lord Chancellor and other Ministers of the Crown to protect the independence of the judiciary. For the first time in its 1,000-year history, the judiciary is officially recognised as fully independent from the government and Parliament and a fully equal branch of the State'. (ibid.)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/royals/article-14307693/meghan-markle-netflix-series-fans-engagement-ring-alteration.html
Meghan Markle has sparked speculation that she has redesigned elements of her engagement ring for the fourth time after the Duchess of Sussex's sparkler appeared to show slight alterations in trailers for her new Netflix series.
Is any one getting messages about personal data, log in with flag warning?
...
Yet one of Netflix's best-known collaborators, the Duchess of Sussex, was barely mentioned at the event - even though her lifestyle show, 'With Love, Meghan', is due to be released in March.
Worse, in another sign that America is falling out of love with the royal couple, a leading comedian at the event made Harry and Meghan's film-making record the butt of a dismissive joke.
Describing his own live talk show, which debuts on March 12, just a few days after Meghan's series is due to launch – John Mulaney said: 'This will be the one place where you [might] see Arnold Schwarzenegger sitting next to Nikki Glaser sitting next to a family therapist with music by Mannequin Pussy…
'This is a really fun experiment. Not since Harry and Meghan has Netflix given more money to someone without a specific plan.'
The Hollywood audience responded with 'snickering' and a few 'whoas', according to a source in the auditorium last night.' . . .
'someone without a specific plan.' That's definitely *. Ouch!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14342715/harry-meghan-ridiculed-comedian-la-netflix-event-duchess-new-show.html
Fecunt
The long game’s lasted
a thousand years
She’ll need more than a Chit
and her cervical smears
To prove beyond doubt
they’re his and heirs…
He truly is an ArchMoron!