Skip to main content

"She's really Interested."

 And we have yet another person making the rounds about how she ought to come back to acting, yada, yada, family would likely support this and so on (claims of how good she is).

This time it is Eric Roberts who worked beside her (no idea if he was invited to the wedding or not).  Last month or maybe it was the month before there was some other article about being in some movie thing with lots of others.  Her part was for a day or two as I recall.

Before that it was in a clip for Clevr Brands.  Don't know if you can count the various Netflix shows or not.  

When I think of where she lives, it's not near the centers of where things are really happening in acting world.  That would make it hard to get back into that kind of circulation.  Montecito reminds me of Frogmore.  Each was out there and far from a lot of other action, nightlife, edgy events.  But what do I know?  I don't live near either and have no real direct knowledge.  Just what I have read.

Is this another trial balloon?  Maybe?  Is it possible that this is some attempt to bring in money?  Probably (hence the idea of family supporting her decision).  

But ... do you think that she will likely get a lot of real offers?


Comments

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


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 is still on.
Girl with a Hat said…
I wonder if she is going to Australia.
There are service stations that are closed down due to lack of petrol
I saw one video of a young woman in a supermarket where the shelves were almost completely bare because everyone had bought up everything in case there was a scarcity of food.
She is truly a weapon of mass destruction.
Girl with a Hat said…
* to return to acting?

https://archive.is/qGSxb
Girl with a Hat said…
Doreen Lawrence was 'conned' into joining a legal claim against newspapers, a key witness in the case said on Monday.

Private detective Gavin Burrows insisted statements submitted to the High Court in his name were 'complete and utter untruth,' adding that Baroness Lawrence, Prince Harry and other public figures in the case were 'seriously misled'.

Giving evidence, Mr Burrows, 55, repeatedly denied he had worked for the Daily Mail or The Mail On Sunday.

Baroness Lawrence, 73, and the Duke of Sussex, 41, are among seven public figures involved in a breach of privacy case against the Mail and the MoS.

Associated Newspapers, which publishes both titles, denies its journalists commissioned private detectives to hack voicemails, intercept landline calls, bug vehicles and properties and 'blag' their private information.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15672887/Doreen-Lawrence-conned-joint-privacy-claim-against-Mail.html

I had forgotten this case was still ongoing.
Maneki Neko said…
I saw that too last night but didn't think it was worth mentioning as I can't see it happening, unless it's a cameo role or some other very minor role. The Royal Observer had a similar headline, 'Meghan's Hollywood Friends Believe She Will Return to Acting: 'She'll Blow Everyone's Mind' '. Yes, she will with her bad acting. If her return to acting hasn't happened by now, it never will.

Her visit to Australia looks like it's in jeopardy. She'll have to resort to plan B to get more money coming in.
Girl with a Hat said…
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2026/03/blind-item-3_23.html#disqus_thread

This is an interesting thread over at CDAN.
They discuss the Harkles` visit to Oz.
But, what intrigued me is the post about the date of the Queen's death. Someone predicted the exact date months before it happened, and also predicted that Charles would die this 28th of March. Let's pray it doesn't happen.
Girl with a Hat said…
https://pagesix.com/2026/03/23/royal-family/meghan-markle-prince-harry-snubbed-by-montecito-neighbors/

Montecito neighbours giving the Harkles the cold shoulder
Maneki Neko said…
I'd imagine that after a bit of curiosity, interest in the duo waned quickly. I don't know if they've ever invited any neighbours, unless they can offer something in return, e.g. Oprah. The neighbours must have seen them for the grifters and grabbers they are, particularly *. Harry is quiet and just an appendage.
Maneki Neko said…
The Australians are not gullible, they 'are demanding that Harry and Meghan pay for themselves on their quasi-royal visit by launching a fresh petition, which has already amassed thousands of signatures.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are set to arrive Down Under next month, but ahead of their trip, an advocacy group, Beyond Australia, has urged the government not to use taxpayer funds for the couple's security, logistics and other requirements.

As of this evening, the petition on Change.org titled No Taxpayer-Funding or Official Support for Harry & Meghan's Private Visit to Australia had reached a total of 32,715 signatures.' . . .

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/royals/article-15675317/Australians-demand-Harry-Meghan-pay-visit-petition-signatures.html
Maneki Neko said…
The trip to Australia doesn't bode well. When will the grifters read the room and realise they're not wanted? They believe, * in particular, that they're the California branch of the RF and that, as such, they'll be feted everywhere. Time for a reality check.

https://www.gbnews.com/royal/meghan-markle-prince-harry-taxpayer-duke-duchess-of-sussex-australia
Well folks what do you think - will His Imperial Highness prince Baldilocks get his taxpayer paid security back because he is internationally very important person?

And will he win his court case against Daily Mail because he said so?

Girl with a Hat said…
There are 2 new books to read about the royals:

One by Hugo Vickers, of which you can read an excerpt here:
https://archive.is/2xjOV
And I believe the Tom Bowers book is finally available in the UK

I have the audiobook version and I will listen to it while painting my kitchen
Girl with a Hat said…
Hard to say how this Labour government will deal with the issue - do they value money or trying to stick it to the BRF more?
The baroness has totally lost her own life and she is just some very disturbed shadow of Catherine of Wales. When the Princess does something/anything the baroness immediately publishes what SHE has done.

Le Métier de Madame 'Arry is to be The Dark Shadow of A Princess, strange!

Maneki Neko said…
Video from Hollywood Confidential on Tom Bower's new book. He discusses her age. He is meticulous about verifying information.

https://youtu.be/zkweQKALEeQ?si=eSPOxRppnan7D02l
Girl with a Hat said…
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c18296cf0c3519e2982713a47ff0a1ce5e16ddee95e44f3ec2f03f3f109a15f7.jpg

even Diana knew!
abbyh said…
I'm thinking that he is unlikely to get the security back.

The public is really against it. Read the room.

The King, the Queen get it full time because he is king and she is his wife. William and family get it full time because they are next in line. No one else in the family gets it full time (that I know of). Everyone goes about living their lives and security shows up when they are to go off and do something in service to King and Country.

And what's changed since they last had it? Nothing to them in UK terms but the cautionary tale of Andrew's really trended downward (and out of the family public orbit), the world has all kinds of wars going off, many are having difficulty financially, job wise, (there are those who still remember rationing) so splashing out in more people, fancy cars with flags and people riding motorcycles to clear the way might not be - well, this might not be the best time to think that a return of privileges which requires UK people to spend all kinds of money (they don't have) supporting this big expense for a whole family - the adults who have not come off as very supportive of the public's concerns, respect for the Commonwealth, recent history of interviews, books, documentaries and so on.

By delaying the decision, they are making absolutely certain they are not overlooking some reason which could make it justifiable to resume their security. Checking every dot and crossing every t. They don't want to appear to be overlooking something.

There is a part of me which is kind of also thinking they keep kicking the decision down the street (farther and farther) maybe because they know it won't go down well in Montecito. No one wants to deliver bad news while sitting across an angry H (and by extension, her).
Maneki Neko said…
True. William, however, was brought up similarly, yet doesn't display the same character.
Girl with a Hat said…
I watched that video and I'm not sure that the card where she listed her age as 21 at the time, is proof of anything. I put in any age in a lot of things when I don't want people to know much about me. The rest of his info is interesting, however, especially the age of her classmates.
Rationing - ah yes!
I still scrape every last smear of butter from its wrapping and shake out every last tea leaf from the shiny wrapping, just like Mum did, and chase the final drop of egg white from the shell!
I've long thought that H is safe from terrorists because they've realise the reaction to something happening to H might not be the national grief that the death of his mother precipitated...
Girl with a Hat said…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_IDJYdaGKs

Tom Bower and *'s past as a yacht girl
Girl with a Hat said…
LOL. There were "No kings" rallies all over the USA today.
I wonder what the Harkles see that news.
Scratch that. I don't think they look at news.
Maneki Neko said…
The gloves are off, possibly. The Queen isn't more, Andrew has been demoted, maybe the time is right to carry on cleaning the Augean Stables and expose *'s shady past.
Maneki Neko said…
Typo - meant The Queen is no more
Girl with a Hat said…
I wonder what the Harkles think when they see that news.
Girl with a Hat said…
Well, the person who predicted the exact date of the Queen's death also predicted that Charles would buy the farm today, March 28th 2026.
I guess since we haven't heard any news, the King is still among us.
Maybe it is a high time that the King says to his son: "Harry, GROW UP AND START BEHAVING AS A RESPONSIBLE ADULT"!

According to Daily beast prince Baldilocks can "consider" a visit to Sandringham during the summer if his father sorts a full security circus for him. And if he gets the security then he can bring his children. That's called dirty blackmail in normal decent person's language.

Because if the King gives in and organizes full security for Harry he comes alone (again) and says na-na-na-naa my wife and children could not come because na-na na-na-NAA, old man. But I demand LOTS of photos of ME and you that I can sell to papers for good money to prove that I am a FULL MEMBER OF THE ROYAL FAMILY and the most important too!

Is the King usually at Sandringham in July? Christmas, yes but the main holiday is at Balmoral in August. Is July simply convenient for H?
Maneki Neko said…
@alianor

The possible visit is now in the national news.

'Now the Sunday Times reports 'those close to Harry' say he 'would welcome an invitation to Sandringham' this summer when he flies to Britain to attend events connected with his Invictus Games.

Notably the Prince and Princess of Wales – from whom he remains firmly estranged – also spend much of their holidays at Sandringham, where they have a country home, Anmer Hall.' (DM)

The RF is at Balmoral in summer, not Sandringham (Christmas). The Independent states “He always loves seeing his father and would love to see him as much as possible.”. I don't know what 'as much as possible' is, Harry has only seen his father twice in two years, and let's not forget Charles had cancer then.

If you want to be invited, you wait for an invitation. By stating publicly that he wants Charles to invite him, it looks like Harry is trying to force his hand. This could put Charles in a difficult position. In any case, if Harry, with or without wifey/children, does not announce his visit and slips in quietly into the country, no one will notice. After all, he was able to slip in and out of the UK and into Toronto unnoticed when seeing *. Once in a royal property, he'll have security. I hope the King says no.
Neil Sean tells us that William has an idea how to destroy the markles's plan to get photos with the King AND their idea of sliding back inside the Family to rescue their economy with His Majesty's money. William wants to have a big Windsor family jamboree to welcome les markles back. I am quite sure that the mere idea of the Princess Royal smiling warmly to mrs baldilocks is enough to keep Harry's wife safely in California for the rest of her life!

If mrs baldilocks does not get what she wants she is surely going to revenge with blood. But the truth is that after these six years of her cheap tricks nobody is going to believe her stories and the damage she caused to the family with her "racism" story etc. will not function anymore. AND that has nothing to do with the family but everything to do with her own lies and hypocrisy!

Maneki Neko said…
Charles and Camilla will go for the US to mark the 250th anniversary of American Independence. Harry, who 'always loves seeing his father and would love to see him as much as possible', will not travel to Washington to see his father. So he's not that keen to see his father, then. Obviously, Charles will probably be on a tight schedule and a visit mightn't be possible. It really makes it sound as if all Harry is interested is police protection rather than seeing his father.
Girl with a Hat said…
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/royals/article-15685435/elizabeth-amy-robsart-murder-tudor-dynasty-virgin-queen-robert-dudley-queens-kings-dastardly-things-podcast.html

On the final episode of their Elizabeth I podcast miniseries, Queens, Kings and Dastardly Things hosts Robert Hardman and Professor Kate Williams unpick why the Virgin Queen never married during her unprecedented 44-year reign.

Available on youtube.
The Wombat Tribune nails it:
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/1s95x7b/fun_sarcasm_from_the_wombat_tribune_on_instagram/
Maneki Neko said…
'Newspapers accused of phone hacking against Prince Harry and other public figures have 'established complete defences' against the claims, their lawyer told the High Court yesterday.

Journalists from the Daily Mail and The Mail on Sunday (MoS) faced 'frankly desperate allegations' during their evidence to the trial brought by Harry and six other public figures, the newspapers' barrister said.' (DM)

Excerpts from Reuters:
'The judge overseeing the lawsuit brought by Prince Harry, singer Elton John and other high-profile figures against the publisher of the Daily Mail at London's High Court said on Tuesday ‌it would take some time before he could deliver his ruling.'
'The publisher rejects their case as being "preposterous smears".'
'The publisher's lawyer Antony White argued that there was no evidence to back up the allegations, the claimants' witnesses were unreliable, and ⁠the case against the papers was scattergun and part of a conspiracy by people with a grudge against the press.'
We shall see.
Maneki Neko said…
@Wild Boar

Thank you for this. It's very funny and I hope most Australians don't take H&* seriously. Good on them to take the pee out of them.
Sassie said…
Whoops, that was a long URL about The Doucheass’ “As ever” advertisement. I just shortened it:

https://shorturl.at/KhjXG
We're not supposed to describe people as `imbeciles' these days but the reports implying that of H indulged in rumpy-pumpy with Charlotte Griffiths, and possibly other female journos, suggests that he qualifies for that description. What a feckin' eejit.
abbyh said…
I don't know how to do that either or if it could be traced back. I am concerned about you and your visibility. Your safety is my main concern.
Dodgy - not certain even though I know it would be helpful.

You know who does post archived pages? The SMM sinners. They discuss things we don't always talk about. I know the topic has been talked about at some point or another and another over there. I am suspecting you could find links there.

Thank you for thinking of us.
Girl with a Hat said…
The authorities in Australia are asking people to take the bus rather than drive in order to save fuel. There are only a few weeks of fuel left in the country. How do you think it will look when they come flouncing into Oz to show the peasants how much better they are?
Magatha Mistie said…

Piste de dissonance

Desperate for a piste of the action
Posing haz
to cause distraction
Poles apart
slippery slope
Abandon all hope
Windsor Easter
summit attraction…

Magatha Mistie said…
@GWAH
Take the bus? I filled up today, pricey
but less than last week!
Usual traffic jams for long weekend
getaways
Remote areas, different
Hopefully there’s an aviation
fuel shortage 😉


Magatha Mistie said…
@WildBoar
Windsor is missing it’s idiot?

Girl with a Hat said…
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15703361/Meghan-rare-video-Harry-Archie-skiing-Duchess-proud.html

* claims that this is Archie skiing but all the commenters say that it could be any young boy since we don't see a face.
Girl with a Hat said…
@Magatha, I'm glad to hear that the situation isn't as dire in Oz as we were led to believe. Happy Easter!
Yet again , I think the proportions of the lad we're shown are those of an older child, ten rather than 6. Then why did one report make a big thing about him having red hair `like his father' when he's wearing a black crash helmet?
Girl with a Hat said…
ooh, this is just horrible.

Speaking of coke, it sounds like the ginger haired cuck one would do a couple of lines and then call and scream at grandma.

https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2026/04/blind-item-12_053410962.html#disqus_thread
Maneki Neko said…
* is so,proud of her boy skiing but as usual, he's seen from the back and wearing a snowsuit with a hood up so it could be absolutely anyone. And he looks rather tall for his age.
As for the cdan blind item, it's really horrible. Some posts are very good and I always like the ones by media_lush. His/her posts never disappoint and the pix on this blind item are worth a look.
https://www.youtube.com/live/FOw7erSk3tk
Royal Rogue's good for a giggle on the Aussie venture and the ski video.
Is it possible that King Charles is keeping his distance to Christianity because he knows his days are numbered and he wants to be sure of his place in paradise?

I don't mean any disrespect, truly, I am just wondering for he has no warm messages to Christians, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists or Jews but just one group.

His time as a monarch has been so chaotic that he may earn a name in history as "Charles III l'Impuissant" or "Charles III le Vacillant". Maybe, just maybe Princess Diana was right when she had thoughts about her husband's ability to handle the "top job".

(PS I know that every person's days are numbered, mine too)

There was never a custom of the monarch giving an Easter address - that was left to the Pope.
The whole thing smells to me like the fuss over the one-and-only flag (at the time, on Buck House) not being flown at half-staff when Diana died. That was stirred up by mischief makers, ignoring h convention that the Royal Standard denoted only the presence/absence of the monarch - lowered when the Queen left the building, raised when she returned and came in. In the meantime, a small version was flown on the Royal car.
The response was to put a second flagpole on BH and fly the Union Flag which would be lowered to half -staff as deemed appropriate . (It all goes back to what happened if a ship of one nation is captured by an enemy - the original flag was lowered to make room for the flag of the victor. For mourning, the space is making room for the flag of Death.
Girl with a Hat said…
If the king gives an address at the end of Ramadan, he should be prepared to do so at Easter as well, especially if the two happen to be close in the calendar.
Any parent knows that one shouldn't show favouritism towards one child. The same principle applies to the father of the nation.
Not mischief making. He is my monarch as well, and I find it shameful and pig headed that he has decided not to do so.
I was not writing about the Easter address but other things that have happened. The King and Queen were wrapping dates for Muslims iftar meal. The King speaks very highly of Muslim faith but never about the problems that faith causes in the West.

But I DO NOT want to harp on about this because I have respect for the King as the head of state and it is not my place. In my country we have problems with politicians who are quite ready to accept almost anything from immigrants but not a thing from our own Christian people and it is disgusting.

Maneki Neko said…
The Monarch is the Defender of the Faith but at the coronation, Selby declared that "the Church established by law... will seek to foster an environment in which people of all faiths and beliefs may live freely". Charles didn't say he would be a defender of all faiths - plural - but is well known to want to encompass all the faiths represented in the UK. He is keen to support a certain faith in particular. I won't say any more as this is a controversial topic.
Girl with a Hat said…
Haznoballs is skiing with Eileen Gu, the traitorous American-Chinese skier and Justin Castreau, the ex-PM of Canada.
https://www.journaldemontreal.com/2026/04/04/en-photo--justin-trudeau-fait-du-ski-avec-le-prince-harry-et-la-championne-olympique-eileen-gu
Maneki Neko said…
Re the Australian weekend little extravaganza, I'm not sure about security concern about an online 'troll'. I think Megs is more concerned about the lack of tickets. If there's a troll, is that you @Magatha?😆. You could be our woman on the ground ;-)

With a lovely photo of *.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/1sd2f2v/happiness_for_meghan_meghans_mole_security_concern/
Girl with a Hat said…
Happy Easter to all the nutties! and for those who don`t celebrate, happy Sunday!
My final comment - traditionally, Easter is the time for Archbishop of Canterbury's message to the nation, by means of the Easter sermon:
https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/archbishop-of-canterbury-easter-message-call-peace-iran-war-5HjdXL2_2/
Maneki Neko said…
So numingbly boringly predictable. We had photos of the BRF going to church yesterday, obviously several of Charles and Camilla and the Waleses. Cue * with a few pix of the children from the back. They're in colour for a change but you can't see the faces. Archie looks rather tall. There's one of him painting an egg (still can't see the face). Riveting. I don't know why she bothers.
Girl with a Hat said…
Archie is painting an egg with incredibly straight lines for a 6 year old. It looks like the effort of a machine. Most 6 year olds have undeveloped motor skills and are still learning to write, but Archie is a prodigy.
abbyh said…
I saw that egg and thought I can't do that well. It is a machine which allows the egg to spin while you hold a marker.
Girl with a Hat said…
but even at 6, his hand can't be that steady
Humor Me said…
It is an "Eggmazing Egg Decorator" - been available here in the states for a few years. Even I can decorate and I am an old lady, lol.
Perhaps someone else `helped' him?
Maneki Neko said…
Don't forget that Archie is a precocious child and a prodigy whose first words were crocodile, hydrate and waffle.
Oh my, oh my.....I tried to start reading Harry's Spare after all this time and I could not, I simply could not because it started with a quote from William Faulkner.

There is no way Harry ever read William Faulkner. And the only book we can say with certainty he has held in his hands was a children's book about some trains but he did not read it just held it in a Youtube piece.

So I will leave the book be for I believe it is just a tale of an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

abbyh said…
I was thinking about that book the other day. In some ways it comes off as the real him by lots of the details (as opposed perhaps to the curated version by the palace suits). There was a lot of focus on drinking, drugging, how his dad failed him, how William always got more, the different girlfriends, then the woman who became his wife, all her agonies (his family not supportive, palace repeatedly not clarifying what he/she thought were errors, how they outshined even his mother on their royal tours, lots of great drama worthy of an opera) and how they had to escape.

With the drinking and drugs, clear hate of the media and others who he felt let him down - it was intense to read as what was clearly viewed as personal. Other parts just did not make sense.

Gosh that was a long time ago.
Does anyone here follow Reddit posts called `HGTUDORFANS' or similar? It's age restricted and I refuse to load an image of my very mature physog , even though I'd like to know what HG thinks of the probability of H getting dumped as deadweight hindering her rise to fabulous wealth. Could the Squad misuse it? Who judges if a post about the Harkles isn't fit for youngsters?
Maneki Neko said…
I don't follow `HGTUDORFANS' so can't help. I tried to go on the website and entered a fictitious dob but then I was asked for verification as 'This page may contain mature content', whatever that is. I'm sure teenagers watch far worse, unless what HG Tudor has to say is really strong stuff. Like you, I refuse to upload any personal info, it's too risky, certainly not any government ID and not a selfie either.
Girl with a Hat said…
Hello, WBBM, no age restrictions here. I think this is what you are referring to:

New video out titled "The End Is Nigh ...!" and Our Glorious Narrator has moved up the timeline on Harry's wife's disengagement from Harry. It will happen sooner than the years out he previously thought. He now says this year or next (!).

In a nutshell, Harry is now dead weight and actually in the way of his wife achieving the prime aims. HG says disengagement is in sight. This video is not one to miss!
Magatha Mistie said…

Meggxit

Megg so eggstatic with
flicks of her chicks
Eggstravagant poses
desperate for clicks
Eggxacting eggxtreme
over egging
Tungsten shell kraken
eggxtra pegging…

Magatha Mistie said…
Hell No Maneki!
I wouldn’t waste my petrol 😉
or ‘rotten egg’ throwing skills
on those two
Hard enough drumming up ditties
boring, bland, blank!

Magatha Mistie said…

Happy Easter (belated)
Hope, renewal and the
triumph of light over darkness


Magatha Mistie said…

@WildBoar
Tradition was upheld
nothing to do with the King

Long Live the King

Magatha Mistie said…

@Humor Me
‘Eggmazing Egg Decorator’
Love it!

Girl with a Hat said…
I noticed that a lot of the threads have a "NSFW" label and are hidden. NSFW= not safe for work. However, when I click on them, they aren't adult content at all, but maybe proprietary content as they give a synopsis of HG Tudor's latest video.
Magatha Mistie said…

Ferkle*

Their last time down under
Caused haz to sunder
those that gave him merit
Their behaviour we heard
Obnoxious tres merde
Exposed the ferreting ferret…

*Urban dictionary





Girl with a Hat said…
Have you gals tried VPNs?
Girl with a Hat said…
He does remind me of a ferret. It was driving me crazy what he reminded me of.

Popular posts from this blog

Cliff Hanger

Deadlines for responses have passed.  Will they show?  Won't they show?   And, rumors of demands for money to cross hands to make appearances (new level of pay to play). Such drama.  You would think this was a soap opera where every episode ends with a crazy cliff hanger story plot to drive the next installment.  Sadly, I don't expect it to change any time soon either.  No.  For them, there appears to be way too much energy left in the will they, won't they to end it now even though everyone else is pretty much tired of it.  Hardly something one can point to and claim that they are trying to reconcile with those who feel distressed about what was printed. Just noticed something: remember that talk of trying to reach out and reconcile after the book, etc.?  It seems to have drifted away, hasn't it?  Hmm.  Interesting.  I wonder if that is recognized as a total lost cause or just delayed into the summer (or fall) campaign (c...

Here comes Trevor

If you're a Beatles fan, you'll know that in the fifty years since the group went its separate ways, almost everyone involved with them has sold his or her story. Only one major figure has not: Jane Asher , who was Paul McCartney's girlfriend for five years during the heyday of the group, and accompanied him on the famous trip to India in 1968. An actress, Jane went on to become a TV personality and famous cake-baker. She has never spoken about her time with McCartney and dislikes being asked. Until recently, the Sussex saga had included a similar figure: Trevor Engelson, Meghan Markle's ex-husband.  Trevor has never spoken about Meg. But he has done well for himself: he married a wealthy woman , continues to work as a producer , and seems to have a loyal (and multi-racial!) circle of friends , unlike some people we know.  He appeared to have excused himself from the whole soggy mess.  Until yesterday, when he was papped. Driving his black Porsch...

But Really, Could they?

 Richard Eden has an interesting article in the DM which references an article in The Guardian about the necessity of the passport applications for the kids as including HRH and the last name of Sussex. Why?  Well supposedly this is all because they want to allow the kids to decide for themselves to become a working royal or continue to stay in private life. The main focus becomes how this bewilders the Palace considering how difficult the parents found it all and then left.  As well has his thoughts that this is about maintaining royal aura ("links" is his term) before ending with how a push for the daughter might be as the American Princess might be helpful to her mommy's business. What I wonder about is:  What or where did they get the idea that the kids would be welcomed into the fold and become working royal? I am not convinced that was ever an option once they stepped back. America doesn't do British history quite the same way or to the same detail.  Manne...