The alliterate former actress turned A list celebrity has agreed to an acting role in a movie provided the compensation is high enough. She wants about 20 times what her salary used to be on her show.
Haha, I'm getting the impression that she really doesn't give a sh!t about the in-laws or the UK, she was just trying to get a bump in status/rating/income, not to mention the child support.
I kind of admire her, who marries into the BRF and doesn't give a sh!t about staying in the BRF? An American that's who! Now if we can only trick the UK into paying for more of our single mothers. It's not like they're going to do DNA tests, that would reveal much bigger secrets about the BRF.🤔
@Tricia13, Markle has already broken most of the rules in the Royal Family.
The problem is, they've run out of enforcement methods. They gave her a crummy house, bad tiaras, and no title for her spawn. Besides putting her in the Tower, what else have they got?
Today's news is that she and Harry are setting up their own "foundation", which will presumably be used to grift off of corporate sponsors in the name of charity.
I do think the idea of a movie role is odd, though. Who is her audience? She supposedly has 8 million Instagram followers, but based on engagement rates. only about 20% of them are real. Who wants to see Meghan in a movie?
BG says she is trying for a new baby pretty much as soon as she can wile she can.....and that site tends to be more accurate. I do think she is a social climber and their marriage won't last, but, I almost see her waiting until she is set for life with all the kids she wants before she comes back to "acting" or a "tell all book.
I think this could be about the voiceover she wanted to do, that "role". Wasn't it a children's cartoon based on her, Harry and a fictional dog (not the dead one, nor the abandoned one) ? Enty had a blind about it months ago. The cartoon was being turned in to an animated film.
Hi Nutty, What do you think about Meghan copyrighting everything...and I mean everything, even the banal words she writes on Instagram. Supposedly only photographers who hand over image copyright to Brand Sussex will now be allowed to work with them. This is just another money making scheme. I don't see how the media is going to be happy knowing that they will have to pay Meghan for every single picture that they use. Even everyday people who post pictures on websites, Instagram, Facebook, etc. will be affected by this copyright as they will need to seek permission and possibly pay money for every image. The legal papers are on the web, not that I could make much sense of them. I just know that they now have control over every item that could possible exist with their name or image on them, including ridiculous things like bras.
@SwishyFishy, I'm not a lawyer, but my guess is that Markle is just taking a shot in the dark and seeing what she can get away with. As her father once told an interviewer, "She likes to bend the rules. She's good at that."
She and Harry could be described as "employees" of the Royal family, and my understanding is that when you are employed, anything you create during that employment (like a photo of the Queen, Prince Philip, and your baby Artifichie) belongs to your employer, not you. (Cue the famous case of the guy who created the Bratz doll while employed by the Barbie people.)
The question is, who wants all this crap with the Sussex name on it? You don't have a brand if you don't have buyers.
Did everyone notice that Prince Phillip got outed as the high ranking royal source of the "Degree wife" quote about MM? (Degree wife= less than three years for her marriage to Harry to last). Express had an article yesterday that named Phillip as the source.
Have to say that she might wanna be more careful - or maybe it's Harry that should be careful. Plane crashes aren't that hard to arrange...and since they already knocked off Diana in a car crash, they have to crash the whole plane this time - mom, baby and dada.
There was an old black and white foreign film adapted from a famous piece of American literature. It got a lot of praise when it was released, but it disappeared after a couple of years, and almost nobody was allowed to see it. The original writer claimed that he didn't like the adaptation, so he blocked public screenings and exploitation for decades. Then, he produced a new version that he claimed was much more faithful to the source material. The remake was a bore, but he said he was pleased with this version. But he had totally different motivations for this. The film had a standout performance by this foreign born singer/actor who at one point had an opportunity to work in Hollywood. During production of his most famous film there, he had an affair with his co-star. Who was the wife of the famous writer. Basically, the writer wanted to prevent the world from seeing how talented the guy who had fucked his wife was, and kept the film out of circulation until he died just because he could.
Given that the nanny is rumoured to be the surrogate, the Queen won't have custody of Nutmeg's child. So as soon as the divorce is announced this summer, she'll be back in Hollywood, baby! While she might have to learn a few acting skills, she'll do that on the side while she merches the hell out of the Duchess name and yachts with every billionaire in town.
If I was the BRF I would give her what she really wants, a staring role in a great film with a great director (of course director would drop out unable to work with the star who is born). However she will only get it if she divorces Harry and gives up all of her parental rights. You know she'd do it. Then I would let nature take it's course. She was a terrible actress in Suits she will die on the big screen. And that will be the end of her. She'll be a joke.
They are technically employees of the Crown and their copyright means nothing, abuse of copyright law if they try to enforce. She's an idiot, full of herself, plain and simple. She was a lawyer on a bad TV show, someone should tell her it wasn't reality.
She has an uncredited cameo on the next season of The Crown as one of Philip's half-breed Jamaican concubines. Her performance was considered 'spot on'.
Yes, Meghan is the rebel who breaks such deeply important "rules" as only pink nail polish, no black and must wear tacky pantyhose. Because that's what QEII likes from the 1942 etiquette rulebook and dutiful, boring Kate goes along with. But Harry is one of Brenda's favorites so Meghan gets away with it.
I mean, "they" banished her to living where she clearly prefers, Frogmore, so it's totally serious.
Yes, Frogmore, a gravesite in her backyard, with the most despised woman in British royal history buried there with her wimpy husband, who couldn't handle being King, public intrusion on the Long Walk and constant flights from Heathrow. A rare gem, indeed, that Frogmore COTTAGE ...
Prince Philip reportedly told Harry that “one steps out with actresses, one doesn’t marry them.” This came out during Turn around-gate on the balcony. Ouch.
If she isn’t satisfied with her current monthly allowance provided by the taxpayers and Harry’s trust fund. Then well shoot, try capitalizing on your fame and bank these big paydays now cause you may just destroy every shred of support she has with that family if she continues to be a working actress while being an active royal.
At QE bday something called, trooping the colors, Harry and Meghan were on the balcony w the whole royal family. It was caught on camera Harry tersely saying something to Meghan. Lip readers were consulted (daily mail) saying he told her to turnaround to watch the event. An IG account that isn’t a fan of hers called messytheduchess, zoomed in on the exchange, created a meme of it (4th or 5th from the top). Meghan just looks so confused and offended.
i didn’t see phillips name either just a senior royal. what do they man by ‘third degree ‘ wife? i don’t get it.
the queen has a couple more cards to play. she can cut off harry’s taxpayer funding and can can revoke his or maybe just her hrh thereby eliminating their free security. after all MM’s flouting of the rules/traditions and disrespectful behaviour could put the RF’s sweet taxpayer funded deal in jeopardy. The queen / charles could then chose to suport them on their own ...or not. Of course charles could changes it whenever he gets the job.
Megs looks liked she was gonna cry when harry told her turn around. I almost felt sorry for her... post partum hormones going wacky and all. But she’ll be back to her annoying self soon enough.
Well I'll be damned. They have since modified the article. Yesterday it said specifically that Prince Phillip was the source of the comment. Today it only says "a senior royal".
@Jne "The Duchess of Sussex has been given the unkind moniker because “she’ll only last three years”, the Sunday Times reported." In the UK it only takes three years to get a university degree. So Prince Phillip was giving MM a slap that she will be gone in less than three years.
@Jne: the Queen can't terminate any taxpayer-funded security - that is decided by the Metropolitan Police and Scotland Yard. It's not the BRF's way to withhold obvious financial support because that would damage the monarchy. The only time Meg will lose the HRH is when they divorce.
The BRF are not like ordinary people. They don't think about punishment by restricting financial support because they have so much money, they don't think about it. Sure, H&M got a crappy house, but that was also because the Queen knew what Megs was about and did not want her to have any claims on anything of real value. It's harder to keep an opinionated American in line than someone from the Commonwealth where the BRF has power.
Kate's allowed to be a photographer and make money. She takes 99% of the family photos. So, Meghan can just bring that up to those in charge if they refuse to allow her....I'm surprised Meg hasn't done the photo copyright thing, yet.
WHY is she sooo bloated? She shouldn't be post partum.
@angela, I am guessing Miller and Monroe for the writer and wife, but I am not sure who was the actor and which play. either "Death of a Salesman" or "The Crucible".
@cat.....even in the legal halls ,no one is quite sure about the Queen having custody of Archie at the moment because the old statue (1717) specifically says ‘grandchildren’ great grandchildren were not mentioned because they were as rare as hen’s teeth in 1717. If this all turns belly up, I think it would be the only thing on earth that could make the Queen abdicate, simply so Charles would then have legal guardianship of all his minor grandchildren.
@nutty......’what else have they got?”. Perhaps Diana asked the same question.
@Ann.....Interesting date line, I recall the very famous and always accurate Chinese astrologer Raymond Low saying the same thing, apparently they got married on a ‘divorce day’ and that the cracks will appear in 3years time.
@Lulu......surrogate or not, Harry’s name is on the birth certificate and by British law he is the child’s father with full custody (uless '1717' kicks in)
@Unknow......I’m not sure if you had heard that all the neighbours at KP complained about them to the Queen and they were basically evicted because Megs wouldn’t toe the line. There are at least four Royal household living at KP and Ginger/Megs were throwing frequent all night parties with friends and strangers on the grounds at all hours, with lots of noise and fireworks. They were spoken to but ignored the warning. It had been background gossip for a while until it was confirmed by the French Ambassador who’s home overlooks the KP grounds. He told a newspaper that ‘ there were parties and fireworks all the time, it was very boring at KP now that they have gone , all you see is the occasional helicopter landing’.
@Do Not Lie...... There is no Queen Consort in Britain, the last one died in 2002. When Charles becomes King , Camilla will become Queen Consort . Kate may become Queen Consort in 20years , if she is still married to William, at the moment she is simply the wife of the oldest son of the heir apparent. Granted a long way ahead of Megs but decades from being Queen Consort.
What MM wants to do and what she can do are two different things. I doubt whether she will be permitted to do that. She’s already causing so many problems the firm has had to hire more staff just to handle MM and now Harry. These are not reporting to the Sussex’s but to handle them. If she doesn’t toe the line she needs to watch her back. The BRF has deep pockets, but they won’t keep paying off people to hide her past. The firm is already putting together the PR and financial plan for the marriage break-up. She’s on thin ice.
Sometimes I think that Meghan hired Sara Latham, Hillary Clinton's former advisor, because she wanted to create a so-called foundation that was actually a slush fund for her own enrichment, similar to the Clinton Foundation.
@Aquagirl, the RF need to get rid of MM without being seen as the "bad guy", as many people saw them when Diana died. I'm sure that's a living memory for both Charles and the Queen.
Meghan's biracial heritage makes this tricky in an increasingly multi-cultural Britain. Nobody wants to see the all-white family ganging up on the Black girl (even though she isn't very Black.)
It seems to me that what they've been doing so far is letting people "discover on their own" that Markle isn't a very nice person, or feel that they are discovering it on their own. That's a better psychological tactic than what Markle herself is using in her own OTT PR.
Alternately, they can convince Harry that spending a good deal of time in Africa is exactly what he needs, and that he should insist that his wife comes with him.
Would she be willing to live in Africa? She might leave on that basis alone.
Frogmore is a beautiful place, and once again, the Royal Mausoleum is where Wallis is buried as is Queen Victoria and Price Albert. You dumbasses keep thinking there's a headstone next to Frogmore Cottage, and it's not at all like that.
Do Not Lie: prove any of those allegations. With actual verifiable facts not rumors and gossip. Thanks.
I used to have to pass FC every weekday...it isn't somewhere I'd choose to live tbh. Also the mausoleum only contains V and A but several other members of the RF, including Edward and Wallis , are buried in ordinary graves outside. I recently nipped down to Windsor to visit old buddies and the flights overhead are horrendous... I'm glad I moved away a few years back. FC is very 'open' to the public and it's an odd place to have given to a fairly popular minor royal like Harry. It's more suited to someone from the lower aristocracy but even that's a poor choice for them too. It really does still look like staff quarters from the outside...it certainly doesn't look lived in by any member of the RF. I have no dog in this fight...objectively I'd say FC was a slight to M and H and a stern telling off from the Queen...Liz was basically pulling her down a peg or two in my humble opinion and knowing the place well.
@Nutty that's easily accomplished with financial blackmail behind the scene. We've all heard the rumors about MM merching clothing gifted by designers and then pocketing the compensation. As well as her public acknowledgment of friend's business opportunities for royal fans etc that also helped pad her bank account. All The Firm needs to do is turn over all the documentation they've quietly acquired to the IRS. Let the IRS publicly announce they plan to prosecute her for tax evasion. Harry can get his divorce without a public backlash.
Krab Wallis Simpson and Edward are buried behind Frogmore Cottage in the ground. You can see both graves from Frogmore Cottage itself. Those graves are not located inside the mausoleum where Victoria and Albert are interred. This was yet another disrespect shown to the couple by the British Royal Family. See link below and you can actually see the gravesite of Wallis Simpson. Edward is next to her.
Did anyone else notice kneepads barely even mentioned Will’s birthday today, and all MeAGAIN did was comment on Kensington’s IG post. If it had been Sparkles Bday Kneepads would have a million posts about how perfect and inspiring she is.
LMAO @Krab trying to convince only himself/herself that Frogmore isn't the airport adjacent smelly old bottom of the barrel of all Windsor properties. Even down to the fucking cemetery in the garden! Ok.
Ah yes and pantyhose are 'tacky', unlike uber-sophisticated and highly elevated bare legs in January in London; the drunken club girl and street hooker fashionz....
@Krab: want to say that again, fool? As Ann said, Wallis and Edward are buried on the GROUNDS. The royal family despised her and would not allow her in the tombs. Are you one of those passing fans of the monarchy in the US, but you haven't educated yourself about it? Many Americans know more about the monarchy than Brits, but you're not one of them.
@emerald: I had heard about the noise, not sure I believe it ... anyway, if a surrogate was used, it's not legally valid for succession. There is a law which provides for "of the body". It has been tested in recent UK case law for the aristocratic hereditary titles. The BRF have committed fraud against the Commonwealth.
@last unknown: great post ... the Windsors do not own Frogmore - that's why they got it, LMAO.
@aqua: I have no idea where Harry and/or Meg are residing, but the evidence certainly suggests it isn't Frogmore. I'd say a rental in the Cotswolds.
@emerald: following on from above ... the surrogate explains why no royal physicians signed off on the birth. That is the purpose of the signatures - to assure the public that they are not being played and that the child is legally allowed to be in the line of succession (being born "of the body"). Years ago, a public official used to have to be present for the birth.
I'd say this is why the Queen is now icing Markle out - she found out too late, but she gave them too much leniency. The Queen wants and needs to distance herself - this is incredibly dangerous in her position.
@ Aus Unknown......yes I know about the 'lawful wedlock and of the body stipulation', unless there was a member of the privy council present at the birth, Archie is out in the cold even if Meghan gave birth herself. We still don't have a confirmation on a privy councillor being there, there are a least a dozen physicians who could have been called as a witness to the birth.
Lulu mentioned that the Queen wouldn't have custody of the child if Archie was a surrogate but legally and genetically Harry is the father, hence the child is her great grandson, even if he might not be eligible to be in line for he throne, so '1717' still kicks in either with the Queen or with Charles when he is King.
Also a link reporting the noisy parties and confirmation from a respected eye witness.
Yes, I'm afraid subtlties go over Meghan's head, she was banished to a derelict house that housed the servants and latterly Windsor castle minions and still doesn't get it. Stupidly stubborn is the only phrase that fits her at this point.
I would not assume that Prince Harry is the father, apparently there is no confirmation of that and rumours say that it is not Harry's child. Meghan was ready to go with eggs on ice, not sure whose sperm was used. Perhaps her dear friend Marcus? Everything with Nutmeg is a scam, so many questions.
I don't believe that for one moment Lulu, however even if it were true it still makes no difference Harry's name is on the birth certificate, thus he is in law Archie's father. There have been many cases in the UK where fathers later found out that a child they raised as their own was not their biological child in all cases the man is still required to pay child support and carry out the legal responsibilities of a father, while also maintaining the legal rights of a parent.
Go back and look at Archie's birth certificate again. Harry's name is on it- typewritten only. Harry hasn't signed it which is necessary for a legal document. A signature would confirm that Harry acknowledges the child as his. So far he hasn't done so. Prince George's birth certificate is also online and you can compare the two. Of course William actually signed George's certificate.
The Queen has custody of children who are heirs to the throne. But if Harry is not the father, she has no custody, and Nutmeg can take the child out of the country to raise. So it does make a difference, @emerald. There have been no Royal MDs signing off on the birth, no public presentation at hospital, no original certificate, a fake pregnancy, a surrogate, and a lot of smoke and mirrors. It is very possible the baby is not Harry's, given all the strange happenings. I would not put it past her.
@Lulu: I agree with you. It's very shady. Also, UK law must be different to Aus law because if a presumed father has been duped, they have legal recourse. Most cases turn on their own set of facts and evidence.
Megan Markle
ReplyDeleteIs that allowed ? I really don’t know what the rules are in the RF (calling out to NuttyFlavor)!
DeleteI swear this blind was already used but maybe the Enterns hip is running out of page view bullshit blinds about her.
ReplyDeleteHaha, I'm getting the impression that she really doesn't give a sh!t about the in-laws or the UK, she was just trying to get a bump in status/rating/income, not to mention the child support.
ReplyDeleteShe can't leave with her son. The Queen has custody of all her grand children.
DeleteShe won't be allowed.
ReplyDeleteI kind of admire her, who marries into the BRF and doesn't give a sh!t about staying in the BRF? An American that's who! Now if we can only trick the UK into paying for more of our single mothers. It's not like they're going to do DNA tests, that would reveal much bigger secrets about the BRF.🤔
ReplyDeleteDefinitely won't be allowed
ReplyDeleteWon't be allowed, f*ck them, they have no jurisdiction on US shores.
ReplyDeleteTheir child/children belong to the Queen
DeleteWhen she dies all the grandchildren will be Charlie's custody.
@Tricia13, Markle has already broken most of the rules in the Royal Family.
ReplyDeleteThe problem is, they've run out of enforcement methods. They gave her a crummy house, bad tiaras, and no title for her spawn. Besides putting her in the Tower, what else have they got?
Today's news is that she and Harry are setting up their own "foundation", which will presumably be used to grift off of corporate sponsors in the name of charity.
I do think the idea of a movie role is odd, though. Who is her audience? She supposedly has 8 million Instagram followers, but based on engagement rates. only about 20% of them are real. Who wants to see Meghan in a movie?
Thank k you Nutty! I saw she and Harry just officially parted ways with William/Kate and the charity they were chairing.. Fab Four No Mo’
Delete@Nutty I've been wondering the same thing--who is her audience? I've never--nor has any I know--seen Suits, can she even really act?
DeleteThanks Flashy /Pj harvey fan. I didn’t see how it could? What’s next—she wants to sign a record deal with Cowell?
ReplyDeleteTo be fair she was a dreadful actress anyway.
DeleteSecond rate pale-skinned inbred kardashian wannabes, what do they care if the chauffeur's son's wife wants to be in a movie?
ReplyDelete@Nutty: nobody wants to see MM in a movie except herself & it will not be allowed. Most likely, it’s not even an option. Just more of her PR BS.
ReplyDeleteBG says she is trying for a new baby pretty much as soon as she can wile she can.....and that site tends to be more accurate. I do think she is a social climber and their marriage won't last, but, I almost see her waiting until she is set for life with all the kids she wants before she comes back to "acting" or a "tell all book.
ReplyDeleteI think this could be about the voiceover she wanted to do, that "role". Wasn't it a children's cartoon based on her, Harry and a fictional dog (not the dead one, nor the abandoned one) ? Enty had a blind about it months ago. The cartoon was being turned in to an animated film.
ReplyDeleteNo fucking way this will be allowed.
ReplyDeleteHow silly to even think it.
Yes, I'm sure it is, the blind said she wanted £1 million to do the voiceover.
ReplyDeleteDiana would be so proud that her son chose such a hardworking famewhore.
ReplyDeleteComplete fucking bullshit and you know it. This site used to be good now its just make believe and copy/paste.
ReplyDeleteHi Nutty, What do you think about Meghan copyrighting everything...and I mean everything, even the banal words she writes on Instagram. Supposedly only photographers who hand over image copyright to Brand Sussex will now be allowed to work with them. This is just another money making scheme. I don't see how the media is going to be happy knowing that they will have to pay Meghan for every single picture that they use. Even everyday people who post pictures on websites, Instagram, Facebook, etc. will be affected by this copyright as they will need to seek permission and possibly pay money for every image. The legal papers are on the web, not that I could make much sense of them. I just know that they now have control over every item that could possible exist with their name or image on them, including ridiculous things like bras.
ReplyDeleteNutty you made me laugh loud. J too.
ReplyDeleteLOVE THIS They gave her a crummy house, bad tiaras, and no title for her spawn. Besides putting her in the Tower, what else have they got?
@SwishyFishy, I'm not a lawyer, but my guess is that Markle is just taking a shot in the dark and seeing what she can get away with. As her father once told an interviewer, "She likes to bend the rules. She's good at that."
ReplyDeleteShe and Harry could be described as "employees" of the Royal family, and my understanding is that when you are employed, anything you create during that employment (like a photo of the Queen, Prince Philip, and your baby Artifichie) belongs to your employer, not you. (Cue the famous case of the guy who created the Bratz doll while employed by the Barbie people.)
The question is, who wants all this crap with the Sussex name on it? You don't have a brand if you don't have buyers.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDid everyone notice that Prince Phillip got outed as the high ranking royal source of the "Degree wife" quote about MM? (Degree wife= less than three years for her marriage to Harry to last). Express had an article yesterday that named Phillip as the source.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1142022/meghan-markle-news-nickname-prince-harry-royal-staff
Where does it name Phillip? Maybe they've edited the article or I'm missing something, but I don't see that part.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHave to say that she might wanna be more careful - or maybe it's Harry that should be careful.
ReplyDeletePlane crashes aren't that hard to arrange...and since they already knocked off Diana in a car crash, they have to crash the whole plane this time - mom, baby and dada.
looking for a triple funeral here.
Want something really juicy and true?
ReplyDeleteThere was an old black and white foreign film adapted from a famous piece of American literature. It got a lot of praise when it was released, but it disappeared after a couple of years, and almost nobody was allowed to see it. The original writer claimed that he didn't like the adaptation, so he blocked public screenings and exploitation for decades. Then, he produced a new version that he claimed was much more faithful to the source material. The remake was a bore, but he said he was pleased with this version.
But he had totally different motivations for this. The film had a standout performance by this foreign born singer/actor who at one point had an opportunity to work in Hollywood. During production of his most famous film there, he had an affair with his co-star. Who was the wife of the famous writer.
Basically, the writer wanted to prevent the world from seeing how talented the guy who had fucked his wife was, and kept the film out of circulation until he died just because he could.
Given that the nanny is rumoured to be the surrogate, the Queen won't have custody of Nutmeg's child. So as soon as the divorce is announced this summer, she'll be back in Hollywood, baby! While she might have to learn a few acting skills, she'll do that on the side while she merches the hell out of the Duchess name and yachts with every billionaire in town.
ReplyDeleteIf I was the BRF I would give her what she really wants, a staring role in a great film with a great director (of course director would drop out unable to work with the star who is born). However she will only get it if she divorces Harry and gives up all of her parental rights. You know she'd do it. Then I would let nature take it's course. She was a terrible actress in Suits she will die on the big screen. And that will be the end of her. She'll be a joke.
ReplyDeleteDo it sparkles! Thats our famewhore at work....USA USA USA bankrupt the monarchy from within
ReplyDelete@Nutty: No one wants to see Meg because we've seen it all before ... all her wares have been exposed.
ReplyDeleteThey are technically employees of the Crown and their copyright means nothing, abuse of copyright law if they try to enforce. She's an idiot, full of herself, plain and simple. She was a lawyer on a bad TV show, someone should tell her it wasn't reality.
ReplyDeleteShe has an uncredited cameo on the next season of The Crown as one of Philip's half-breed Jamaican concubines. Her performance was considered 'spot on'.
ReplyDeleteYes, Meghan is the rebel who breaks such deeply important "rules" as only pink nail polish, no black and must wear tacky pantyhose. Because that's what QEII likes from the 1942 etiquette rulebook and dutiful, boring Kate goes along with. But Harry is one of Brenda's favorites so Meghan gets away with it.
ReplyDeleteI mean, "they" banished her to living where she clearly prefers, Frogmore, so it's totally serious.
@Krab Wait there is a place called Frogmore. hahaha, sorry ribbit.
ReplyDeleteYes, Frogmore, a gravesite in her backyard, with the most despised woman in British royal history buried there with her wimpy husband, who couldn't handle being King, public intrusion on the Long Walk and constant flights from Heathrow. A rare gem, indeed, that Frogmore COTTAGE ...
ReplyDeletePrince Philip reportedly told Harry that “one steps out with actresses, one doesn’t marry them.” This came out during Turn around-gate on the balcony. Ouch.
ReplyDeleteIf she isn’t satisfied with her current monthly allowance provided by the taxpayers and Harry’s trust fund. Then well shoot, try capitalizing on your fame and bank these big paydays now cause you may just destroy every shred of support she has with that family if she continues to be a working actress while being an active royal.
Philip is quoted saying what the Queen cannot say.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, why is this coming out now? That quote must be more than a year old.
What if this whole thing is Harry's revenge for his mother's death? What's a better FU than marrying the craziest b!tch you can find?
ReplyDeleteTurnaround gate? I've been out of computer range for a bit, what does this mean?
ReplyDeleteIf Markle dont show titties or ass, i dont care.
ReplyDeletePrincess Diana was going to star in 'The Bodyguard' sequel
ReplyDeleteshe even met Costner and then she had that car accident
At QE bday something called, trooping the colors, Harry and Meghan were on the balcony w the whole royal family. It was caught on camera Harry tersely saying something to Meghan. Lip readers were consulted (daily mail) saying he told her to turnaround to watch the event. An IG account that isn’t a fan of hers called messytheduchess, zoomed in on the exchange, created a meme of it (4th or 5th from the top). Meghan just looks so confused and offended.
ReplyDeletei didn’t see phillips name either just a senior royal.
ReplyDeletewhat do they man by ‘third degree ‘ wife? i don’t get it.
the queen has a couple more cards to play. she can cut off harry’s taxpayer funding and can can revoke his or maybe just her hrh thereby eliminating their free security. after all MM’s flouting of the rules/traditions and disrespectful behaviour could put the RF’s sweet taxpayer funded deal in jeopardy.
The queen / charles could then chose to suport them on their own ...or not.
Of course charles could changes it whenever he gets the job.
Megs looks liked she was gonna cry when harry told her turn around.
ReplyDeleteI almost felt sorry for her... post partum hormones going wacky and all. But she’ll be back to her annoying self soon enough.
Well I'll be damned. They have since modified the article. Yesterday it said specifically that Prince Phillip was the source of the comment. Today it only says "a senior royal".
ReplyDelete@Jne "The Duchess of Sussex has been given the unkind moniker because “she’ll only last three years”, the Sunday Times reported." In the UK it only takes three years to get a university degree. So Prince Phillip was giving MM a slap that she will be gone in less than three years.
@Jne: the Queen can't terminate any taxpayer-funded security - that is decided by the Metropolitan Police and Scotland Yard. It's not the BRF's way to withhold obvious financial support because that would damage the monarchy. The only time Meg will lose the HRH is when they divorce.
ReplyDeleteThe BRF are not like ordinary people. They don't think about punishment by restricting financial support because they have so much money, they don't think about it. Sure, H&M got a crappy house, but that was also because the Queen knew what Megs was about and did not want her to have any claims on anything of real value. It's harder to keep an opinionated American in line than someone from the Commonwealth where the BRF has power.
Angela, I'm trying to geuss but the second paragraph is unclear.
ReplyDeleteI her getting divorced soon.
ReplyDeleteKate's allowed to be a photographer and make money. She takes 99% of the family photos. So, Meghan can just bring that up to those in charge if they refuse to allow her....I'm surprised Meg hasn't done the photo copyright thing, yet.
ReplyDeleteWHY is she sooo bloated? She shouldn't be post partum.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Delete@angela, I am guessing Miller and Monroe for the writer and wife, but I am not sure who was the actor and which play. either "Death of a Salesman" or "The Crucible".
ReplyDelete@cat.....even in the legal halls ,no one is quite sure about the Queen having custody of Archie at the moment because the old statue (1717) specifically says ‘grandchildren’ great grandchildren were not mentioned because they were as rare as hen’s teeth in 1717. If this all turns belly up, I think it would be the only thing on earth that could make the Queen abdicate, simply so Charles would then have legal guardianship of all his minor grandchildren.
ReplyDelete@nutty......’what else have they got?”. Perhaps Diana asked the same question.
@Ann.....Interesting date line, I recall the very famous and always accurate Chinese astrologer Raymond Low saying the same thing, apparently they got married on a ‘divorce day’ and that the cracks will appear in 3years time.
@Lulu......surrogate or not, Harry’s name is on the birth certificate and by British law he is the child’s father with full custody (uless '1717' kicks in)
@Unknow......I’m not sure if you had heard that all the neighbours at KP complained about them to the Queen and they were basically evicted because Megs wouldn’t toe the line. There are at least four Royal household living at KP and Ginger/Megs were throwing frequent all night parties with friends and strangers on the grounds at all hours, with lots of noise and fireworks. They were spoken to but ignored the warning. It had been background gossip for a while until it was confirmed by the French Ambassador who’s home overlooks the KP grounds. He told a newspaper that ‘ there were parties and fireworks all the time, it was very boring at KP now that they have gone , all you see is the occasional helicopter landing’.
@Do Not Lie...... There is no Queen Consort in Britain, the last one died in 2002. When Charles becomes King , Camilla will become Queen Consort . Kate may become Queen Consort in 20years , if she is still married to William, at the moment she is simply the wife of the oldest son of the heir apparent. Granted a long way ahead of Megs but decades from being Queen Consort.
What MM wants to do and what she can do are two different things. I doubt whether she will be permitted to do that. She’s already causing so many problems the firm has had to hire more staff just to handle MM and now Harry. These are not reporting to the Sussex’s but to handle them. If she doesn’t toe the line she needs to watch her back. The BRF has deep pockets, but they won’t keep paying off people to hide her past. The firm is already putting together the PR and financial plan for the marriage break-up. She’s on thin ice.
ReplyDeleteSometimes I think Meghan might actually be the cool down to earth one while Kate is the uptight b*tch.
ReplyDeleteSometimes I think that Meghan hired Sara Latham, Hillary Clinton's former advisor, because she wanted to create a so-called foundation that was actually a slush fund for her own enrichment, similar to the Clinton Foundation.
ReplyDelete@Nutty: I’m with you, but why would this be allowed (or is their ‘way out’ to get rid of MM?)
ReplyDelete+1: Do Not Lie
ReplyDelete@unknown: they got a crappy house but they’re not even living there. Where do you think they ate?
ReplyDelete*are
ReplyDelete@Aquagirl, the RF need to get rid of MM without being seen as the "bad guy", as many people saw them when Diana died. I'm sure that's a living memory for both Charles and the Queen.
ReplyDeleteMeghan's biracial heritage makes this tricky in an increasingly multi-cultural Britain. Nobody wants to see the all-white family ganging up on the Black girl (even though she isn't very Black.)
It seems to me that what they've been doing so far is letting people "discover on their own" that Markle isn't a very nice person, or feel that they are discovering it on their own. That's a better psychological tactic than what Markle herself is using in her own OTT PR.
Alternately, they can convince Harry that spending a good deal of time in Africa is exactly what he needs, and that he should insist that his wife comes with him.
Would she be willing to live in Africa? She might leave on that basis alone.
And if she was indeed willing to move but continued to misbehave, Africa would be a very convenient place to, well, take other measures.
ReplyDeleteFrogmore is a beautiful place, and once again, the Royal Mausoleum is where Wallis is buried as is Queen Victoria and Price Albert. You dumbasses keep thinking there's a headstone next to Frogmore Cottage, and it's not at all like that.
ReplyDeleteDo Not Lie: prove any of those allegations. With actual verifiable facts not rumors and gossip. Thanks.
I used to have to pass FC every weekday...it isn't somewhere I'd choose to live tbh. Also the mausoleum only contains V and A but several other members of the RF, including Edward and Wallis , are buried in ordinary graves outside. I recently nipped down to Windsor to visit old buddies and the flights overhead are horrendous... I'm glad I moved away a few years back. FC is very 'open' to the public and it's an odd place to have given to a fairly popular minor royal like Harry. It's more suited to someone from the lower aristocracy but even that's a poor choice for them too. It really does still look like staff quarters from the outside...it certainly doesn't look lived in by any member of the RF. I have no dog in this fight...objectively I'd say FC was a slight to M and H and a stern telling off from the Queen...Liz was basically pulling her down a peg or two in my humble opinion and knowing the place well.
Delete@Nutty that's easily accomplished with financial blackmail behind the scene. We've all heard the rumors about MM merching clothing gifted by designers and then pocketing the compensation. As well as her public acknowledgment of friend's business opportunities for royal fans etc that also helped pad her bank account. All The Firm needs to do is turn over all the documentation they've quietly acquired to the IRS. Let the IRS publicly announce they plan to prosecute her for tax evasion. Harry can get his divorce without a public backlash.
ReplyDeleteKrab Wallis Simpson and Edward are buried behind Frogmore Cottage in the ground. You can see both graves from Frogmore Cottage itself. Those graves are not located inside the mausoleum where Victoria and Albert are interred. This was yet another disrespect shown to the couple by the British Royal Family. See link below and you can actually see the gravesite of Wallis Simpson. Edward is next to her.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.findagrave.com/memorial/4252/Wallis-Simpson
The Royal Mausoleum is where Victoria and Albert are interred.
https://www.royal.uk/royal-mausoleum-frogmore
Did anyone else notice kneepads barely even mentioned Will’s birthday today, and all MeAGAIN did was comment on Kensington’s IG post. If it had been Sparkles Bday Kneepads would have a million posts about how perfect and inspiring she is.
ReplyDeleteLMAO @Krab trying to convince only himself/herself that Frogmore isn't the airport adjacent smelly old bottom of the barrel of all Windsor properties. Even down to the fucking cemetery in the garden! Ok.
ReplyDeleteAh yes and pantyhose are 'tacky', unlike uber-sophisticated and highly elevated bare legs in January in London; the drunken club girl and street hooker fashionz....
@Krab: want to say that again, fool? As Ann said, Wallis and Edward are buried on the GROUNDS. The royal family despised her and would not allow her in the tombs. Are you one of those passing fans of the monarchy in the US, but you haven't educated yourself about it? Many Americans know more about the monarchy than Brits, but you're not one of them.
ReplyDelete@emerald: I had heard about the noise, not sure I believe it ... anyway, if a surrogate was used, it's not legally valid for succession. There is a law which provides for "of the body". It has been tested in recent UK case law for the aristocratic hereditary titles. The BRF have committed fraud against the Commonwealth.
@last unknown: great post ... the Windsors do not own Frogmore - that's why they got it, LMAO.
@aqua: I have no idea where Harry and/or Meg are residing, but the evidence certainly suggests it isn't Frogmore. I'd say a rental in the Cotswolds.
@Lauren: LOL at 'kneepads'.
@emerald: following on from above ... the surrogate explains why no royal physicians signed off on the birth. That is the purpose of the signatures - to assure the public that they are not being played and that the child is legally allowed to be in the line of succession (being born "of the body"). Years ago, a public official used to have to be present for the birth.
ReplyDeleteI'd say this is why the Queen is now icing Markle out - she found out too late, but she gave them too much leniency. The Queen wants and needs to distance herself - this is incredibly dangerous in her position.
@ Aus Unknown......yes I know about the 'lawful wedlock and of the body stipulation', unless there was a member of the privy council present at the birth, Archie is out in the cold even if Meghan gave birth herself. We still don't have a confirmation on a privy councillor being there, there are a least a dozen physicians who could have been called as a witness to the birth.
ReplyDeleteLulu mentioned that the Queen wouldn't have custody of the child if Archie was a surrogate but legally and genetically Harry is the father, hence the child is her great grandson, even if he might not be eligible to be in line for he throne, so '1717' still kicks in either with the Queen or with Charles when he is King.
Also a link reporting the noisy parties and confirmation from a respected eye witness.
https://observer.com/2019/05/prince-harry-meghan-markle-kensington-palace-nottingham-cottage-big-parties/
Yes, I'm afraid subtlties go over Meghan's head, she was banished to a derelict house that housed the servants and latterly Windsor castle minions and still doesn't get it. Stupidly stubborn is the only phrase that fits her at this point.
I would not assume that Prince Harry is the father, apparently there is no confirmation of that and rumours say that it is not Harry's child. Meghan was ready to go with eggs on ice, not sure whose sperm was used. Perhaps her dear friend Marcus? Everything with Nutmeg is a scam, so many questions.
ReplyDeleteI don't believe that for one moment Lulu, however even if it were true it still makes no difference Harry's name is on the birth certificate, thus he is in law Archie's father. There have been many cases in the UK where fathers later found out that a child they raised as their own was not their biological child in all cases the man is still required to pay child support and carry out the legal responsibilities of a father, while also maintaining the legal rights of a parent.
ReplyDeleteGo back and look at Archie's birth certificate again. Harry's name is on it- typewritten only. Harry hasn't signed it which is necessary for a legal document. A signature would confirm that Harry acknowledges the child as his. So far he hasn't done so. Prince George's birth certificate is also online and you can compare the two. Of course William actually signed George's certificate.
ReplyDeleteThe Queen has custody of children who are heirs to the throne. But if Harry is not the father, she has no custody, and Nutmeg can take the child out of the country to raise. So it does make a difference, @emerald. There have been no Royal MDs signing off on the birth, no public presentation at hospital, no original certificate, a fake pregnancy, a surrogate, and a lot of smoke and mirrors. It is very possible the baby is not Harry's, given all the strange happenings. I would not put it past her.
ReplyDelete@emerald: no, all that had to happen was a royal physician signing off to quell the rumours ...
ReplyDeleteFact is, we'll never know.
@Lulu: I agree with you. It's very shady. Also, UK law must be different to Aus law because if a presumed father has been duped, they have legal recourse. Most cases turn on their own set of facts and evidence.
ReplyDelete