Thursday, November 08, 2018

Blind Item #9

I love there are other people jumping in on the exposing the yachting past of the alliterate actress turned A+ list celebrity.  One recent addition also exposes the long time boyfriend of this closeted foreign born A list mostly movie actor. 

56 comments:

MontanaMarriott said...

Megan Markle and ??

sandybrook said...

Markle hi click bait biters!

Angela said...

Your mandatory Meghan Markle blind of the day, this time with extra closeted gay content!

MontanaMarriott said...

Hugh Jackman?

MDAnderson said...

Megan Markle and Eddie Redmayne

Brayson87 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
sandybrook said...

And Cumberbitches welcome back too we miss you!

Brayson87 said...

+1 MD

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-6367877/Resurfaced-snap-shows-Meghan-Markle-Eddie-Redmayne-Soho-House-Istanbul.html

Dena said...

Isn't Benedict Cumberbatch's wife a hooker witch or something?

sandybrook said...

Mrs. Cumbrrbitch has a past as a paid companion allegedly.

Brayson87 said...

"A photograph of Meghan and Eddie Redmayne at Soho House Istanbul has resurfaced online - years before they partied together at the club's Amsterdam launch this autumn.

The picture shows the smiling pair with London-based photographer Jason Bailey in Turkey in 2015, a year before the now Duchess of Sussex started dating Prince Harry.

Sharing the snap on Twitter, Jason wrote: 'Night in, watching movies and remember fun times with this crew ❤️ #EddieRedmayne @meghanmarkle #istanbul' "

MDAnderson said...

I don’t mind MM, but she does seem to have connections with Soho House all over the world.

Brayson87 said...

@MD, So is Soho House basically a chain of brothels? Is that the gist of it?

"Soho House is an exclusive private members' club that charges members £830 a year for admittance to one house and £1,500 for its 'houses' across the world.

Both Meghan and Harry are known to be a big fan of the chain, and are understood to have had their first date at Soho House's Dean Street Townhouse in London.

Meanwhile, the Duchess of Sussex - who is close friends with owner Markus Anderson - has previously stayed at Soho Farmhouse in the Cotswolds, sharing Instagram snaps of her and Millie Mackintosh there back in 2016, when her romance with Harry was beginning."

MDAnderson said...

@Brayson. I think that’s what Enty is hinting at!! She also hung out with Harry at the Soho House in Toronto.

Hannah J. said...

Eddie was there with his "wife" and also Jamie Dornan and his wife, who are also good friends with that Markus guy. Hey, maybe Eddie and Markus are the couple. Oh if those walls could talk!

Vix said...

Not sure what benefit is gained by exposing someone’s yachting past. There are plenty of abusers etc in entertainment I’d target first. So what if someone’s been a hooker?

L 21 said...

If soho house is so exclusive, how come MM was granted membership when all her claim to fame then was Suits?

Sd Auntie said...

Here come all the mean gals frothing at the mouth.

Brayson87 said...

@MD, yes, certainly seems shady, who has dates at private clubs, oh yeah the people who have to schedule them.

Seriously said...

Jamie Dornan and Eddie Redmayne are the long term gay couple. They used to share a house in LA and were together in LA this week. Jamie’s wife and kids and his relationship with Dakota Johnson are bearding x 2.

Aquagirl said...

I’ve been to the SOHO House in NY a few times with someone I used to work with who was a member. She thought it was great, but I dreaded going there. It was too Euro-Trashy for my taste (as was she). We’d be eating lunch, (sometimes with clients) and there’d be women lying by the pool in their thong bikinis. I really don’t want to look at someone’s bare ass while I’m eating, and yes there were definitely lots of hook/ups going on.

Florin said...

Oh goody. I was starting to doubt Enty's commitment to MarkleMotion.

Brayson87 said...

+1 Florin for the Donnie Darko reference :)

Hamid said...

I have it on good authority that Mega was seen in the vicinity shortly before the Titanic sinking. She's a narcissist and not to be trusted.

Jon said...

Anthony Hopkins

Brayson87 said...

Oh you know the Titanic was fully stocked with talent, it was the biggest yacht of all time ;)

cupofteaandsliceofcake said...

Shady world. £1500 a year and you might meet princes and A+ celebs? Where do I sign? Oh no? I'm not famous or infamous

mercyprosperity said...

Who. The. Hell. Cares.

Nutty_Flavor said...

Enty is right, though - the Royal knives are out for Meghan.

New piece in Friday’s Sun about Meg fighting with the Queen over an emerald tiara. Also says the Queen questioned why Meg was wearing a veil for her second (third) wedding.

Several paragraphs on how Meghan was treating staff poorly and that “Meghan can be difficult,”

“The message from the Queen was very much that Meghan needed to think about how she speaks to staff members and be careful to follow family protocols.”

Sd Auntie said...

Sounds like a bunch of Malarkey about Markle. Nutty, you are way too smart to believe these fairy tales.

Hortensia said...

Megan and the Queen fighting over an emerald tiara LOL!!!

That makes them sound like Jerry Springer "guests."

Nutty_Flavor said...

Thank you, Sd Auntie. I'm in the media myself (in a totally unrelated field) and I'm thoroughly enjoying watching these competing PR teams go at each other like fighting roosters, which is what we're seeing here. Feathers flying all over the place.

On Markle's side there is some genuine PR talent, someone with the contacts and skill to get stories in top-level establishment media framed Meghan's way. (I saw one this week that read, "Why Meghan is choosing to cut ties with Will and Kate." Uh, I think it went down the other way, folks.)

Someone's paying for that very expensive PR talent. Who?

And who's paying for all the sock puppets that show up in every comment section to defend Meghan? And why?

On the other side we have the Royals with their wide network of press contacts, particularly in the UK, although they lost some of their experienced operators in 2016 and it shows.

Whomever is running their PR show now is putting out a wide net - increasingly negative stories about Meghan everywhere from the Telegraph to the Mail to the still very widely-read Sun.

The Royal reporters were also using their bitchiest tone about Markle on Twitter during the Australian trip. "I so deeply respect this Duchess' sacrifice and service," one Tweeted after she'd changed clothes for the fifth time that day.

Something is going on. I find it fascinating. Your mileage may vary.

Nutty_Flavor said...

@Hortensia, the emerald tiara was being fought over because Meghan insisted on wearing it, but it was thought to have come from the Russian monarchy.

Not a good idea to start your Royal Marriage wearing a tiara worn by an unfortunate royal who was stood up against the wall and shot.

What happened to the Romanovs is a little ghost that haunts the psyche of every modern royal.

Cuddlebutt said...

@Nutty i am loving your knowledge and perspective. I'm not sure about Megs. I do want to like her at times and can completely sympathize about her family. I would also be no contact with the father and half-siblings. But her uncle who helped her? And her mom's family? And she certainly seemed to jump the queue. Invited to Sandringham so soon when Kate waited forever among other things. I dunno. She seems to easily excise people from her life. Sometimes too easily. Is she loyal to anyone?

Nutty_Flavor said...

@Cuddlebutt, I think Markle is who she is, which is someone who worked very hard (both vertically and horizontally) to get to the lower middle of the entertainment industry.

(In that sense, she reminds me of Madonna, who did pretty much the same but rose a lot higher. Madonna also has very few old friends -having discarded many along the way - and some strained family relationships.)

By our late 30s, most of us have defined who we are and what works for us. That's true for Meghan too, and it seems like she's trying to transfer what worked for her in show business to the Royal business. It's not going well.


The more I see of Markle, the more I wish that Harry had chosen one of the millions of gorgeous African women with great educations and sophisticated manners. Wouldn't have to be an African royal, just someone from a solid, well-educated family, someone with Lupita's looks, Grace Kelly's bearing, plus charm and an irresistible smile.

Only an inveterate racist could resist such a princess.

In general, diversifying the British Royal Family is a great idea, and makes them more relevant to a multi-cultural Britain.

Unfortunately, Harry picked the wrong woman. Wrong in so many ways.

cupofteaandsliceofcake said...

@Nutty - good comment about the Russian Tiara and its a solid reminder what can happen to Royals, also of course at that time the British Royals had the option to offer the Romanov's safe harbour to the UK, but they didn't and we know the rest of the story. THat would have been a nice side story to the wedding. I dont believe the tiara story anyway.I doubt the Queen opened her sideboard next to her Gin cabinet and said "pick any Tiara you want out of this 38 piece collection,but that one".

Nutty_Flavor said...

Good point about not offering the Romanovs safe harbor. George V was a first cousin to the Tsar - that's like William not offering Eugenie safe harbor and letting her get shot.

Anyway, re: the cabinet of tiaras. I would imagine that Meghan was looking at some sort of published collection of the Queen's jewellery - like "The Queen's Jewels: The Personal Collection of Elizabeth II", available on Amazon and presumably at Kensington Palace - and said, I'd like to wear THAT ONE please.

Lots of press about the emerald tiara today - it looks as if Queen Mary bought it at a knockoff price from a desperate Russian refugee, and it might actually legally belong to the current Russian government.

I guess that's what Liz meant when she said "it is of uncertain provenance" and didn't want it worn at the wedding.

Unknown said...

@Nutty_Flavor So the royals are the ones publishing the negative stories about her?

Nutty_Flavor said...

The Royals' press team feeds stories to the royal reporters.

The reporters could always say "no", of course, but these are pretty salacious stories that draw tons of clicks.

Reporters battle to be the one to get the best scoops, usually by promising to do something else - like writing a boring flattering story ("Prince Charles is so widely admired on his 70th birthday") or burying an unflattering one.

Unknown said...

Why their press team is feeding negative stories about her though? Is the family trying to paint her in a negative light and get rid of her?

Nutty_Flavor said...

My guess is that both she and they know her days at the palace are numbered.

The Australia trip might have been one last chance to show herself in a good light, and she messed it up by making it too much about herself and not enough about the hosts.

The expensive fashion was also not a good look when the UK is supposedly under an austerity program. Kate has been making a big deal about re-wearing old clothes recently.

Anyway, if Meghan leaves, there will be a PR battle royale, no pun intended.

I think both sides are positioning themselves for that now.

But that's just my opinion. I'm not an insider.

Redhead66 said...

How can she literally leave not even being married a year? The RF wold be ok with that? MM just walking out of BP tossing her hair and saying so long "Bi**hes". I just cant imagine the Queen going for that. If anything MM will be made to disappear quietly.... no?

Nutty_Flavor said...

One possibility is an annulment, a payoff, and a strict NDA.

Another is, as you say, a tunnel in Paris.

Times have changed, though, and I’m not sure the Royals can get away with that any more.

Krab said...

Oh please. An annulment? Back to fan fiction land. Harry obviously is crazy about her and they're having a baby. Oh wait, I forgot, it's a fake baby because she's really a man.

I don't know what disgruntled idiot put something out about an emerald tiara, but the story doesn't even make any sense.

Krab said...

If they're talking about this one, the queen herself has worn it lots of times and there's no way it belongs to the Russians. what utter nonsense.

http://orderofsplendor.blogspot.com/2011/12/readers-top-15-tiaras-6-grand-duchess.html

hothotheat said...

She was friends with owner maybe?

Juliet Scott said...

Markle has already caused a great deal of damage to the Royal family. Her greed and extravagance is off the scale, and her background is very unsavoury and full of skeletons. It is obvious that William and Kate can't bear to be near her.

Snuggz Bear said...

@Nutty_Flavor- some also think that because Princess Eugenie wore a large emerald tiara that the Queen didn't want Smeghan to wear an emerald tiara first.

Nutty_Flavor said...

Could be! Poor Eugenie had to push her wedding back to fall so Meghan could have the spring date.

Fun fact: Emeralds are also associated with Wallis Simpson. She was given an emerald engagement ring by Edward VIII.

I learned by reading about it that emeralds are not practical for everyday wear. Apparently they scratch easily.

Snuggz Bear said...

Yes @Nutty emeralds are fragile and also crack easily. Emeralds are my birthstone and I have some earrings but they are not recommended for a ring because of the fragile nature of the stone. Synthetic emeralds are quite nice though.

I was thinking that if the Queen didn't want the allegedly Russian tiara worn because the then owner might have been shot, it would then be "perfect" for Meghan. So much has been written about the shade being thrown at Meghan by the Queen, such as May 19th being when Anne Boleyn was executed, superstition that it is bad luck to get married in May for royal weddings, and the Sussex title last being held by an undesirable duchess, etc. That's why I think Eugenie wanted an emerald tiara from the start because of her reddish hair and she really did look lovely in it, and she is the Queen's granddaughter of course- first dibs. A lot of people compare Markle to Wallis Simpson, too, in the way she seems to control Harry.

Nutty_Flavor said...

Another story just dropped saying that Meghan’s personal assistant has resigned after only 6 months of service.

The palace PR attack on Meghan continues. Who else would even have that information?

Paul Saint John said...

Why not say it? Harry's an idiot. He could have married any young woman in the world and he picked up a gold-digging aging hooker.

cupofteaandsliceofcake said...

It’s intresting indeed. You don’t mess with the Royal family of do anything to show them in a bad light. H&M have had a few PR disasters. The Royals will throw an outsider under the bus, married to a favourite child or not. The institution and its mammoth PR machine. Don’t be taken in by the smiles and waving, the British Monarchy to survive hundreds of years and keep positive public favour is ruthless

Paul Saint John said...

Ok, if they're so ruthless, how come they let Harry marry a skank in the first place? Disfunctional is the first word that comes to mind when thinking about the Windsor Family.

Nutty_Flavor said...

The rumor has been that Harry and Meghan got married in Botswana without royal authorization, months before their official ceremony in England. So it wasn’t so much a matter of “letting him get married” as letting him publicly confirm a marriage that already existed. Just a rumor, but it would explain a lot.

mercyprosperity said...

@Nutty+Flavor

An earlier wedding in Botswana, this would explain a great deal.
Henry has a history of doing exactly what he wants, then dealing with the Queen later.

Advertisement

Popular Posts from the last 30 days