SWC Show, Quatrième Partie

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R1 I love this comment to the article:

[quote]Most of us have an opinion on this, but they don't all get in the media , thankfully. Meghan really needs to learn when to be quiet, and this is one time when her opinion isn't wanted or needed. This isn't about her, or is she upset that someone else is getting the media attention. Enjoy your privacy, you asked for it, you got it.

Exactly right, r2

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Does the Queen's Anglican Church recognise astrology?

Or is Meghan just being a thoughtless asshole.

Again.

r1 She doesn't have a camp, she IS camp. Drag Queens of the future are drooling over her.

Really, r6? Would that be because of the hair pieces? The plastic surgery? The fillers? The inability to find any piece of clothing that actually fits her?

Or is it simply that she has a barrel body just like a man dressing as a woman might also have?

She can't help but stick her oar in to stir the already troubled waters of the Queen....

And she clearly doesn't realise that she's next.

I have to say it. The entire Pedrew, Harckle, Swollen Charles, stunned Queen dramas are the best ever soap opera dramas in living history. Nothing can beat these guys roughing each other up and bringing the throne down with them. Can't wait for the movie.

I don't think this will bring down the BRF, but it will hasten the Swedenizing of the monarchy. The current generation had better raise its children to go to school and get real jobs, because the gravy train is over except for the heir. Even Charlotte and Louis should be raised with the expectation that while they may take on some engagements, their children will not have royal titles or a royal lifestyle.

Really, it's a goldmine of bitchery. You could't ask for a better fit with the DL.

With unerring instinct, rather than doing the sensible thing and keeping their heads down after stirring up controversy for the BRF and announcing their drawback for six weeks, Meghan manages to shift some of a story that isn't remotely about her, to showcase what she thinks the British public really cares about: Meghan's Wokeness. She simply cannot, can NOT, keep herself out of the limelight for long. Like a moth to the flame, she cannot resist any opportunity to get herself into the news. But we know what happens to moths at candles, don't we?

Meanwhile, we have the Diplomatic Reception to look forward to on 11 December (wasn't that Abdication Day in 1936?) and lots of jewels and gowns. That is also the day before the GE. I do hope Kate is doing up the bling and I would appreciate it if we could be spared another look at the Cambridge Lover's Knot tiara, I'd really like to see her in a different tiara . . .

Something that proclaims the Queen's appreciation for Kate's unfailing discretion and loyalty . . . something really special, although it will have to be something the Queen and Camilla don't regularly wear . . . suggestions?

[QUOTE] Or is it simply that she has a barrel body just like a man dressing as a woman might also have?

The one who looks like a man is looming 5ft 10 Kate with her flat chest and ass. Little curvy 5ft 4 Meghan is hardly manly.

Meghan and Harry of course disapprove of corrupt Uncle Andy, although she hasn't given an interview or made a statement, has she? Pure speculation on the part of the tabloids, but of course you Klan gals see gossip as gospel if it concerns Meghan.

Andrew should head out to his Dubai or Mustique bolthole, sans security, and stay there until 2020. No public outings with any of the other royals.

Klan thread, Muriel! Please delete. They already have two other racist threads running.

Swipe for the life of Queen Victoria's daughter Princess Alice.

Ladies with furs...Queen Elizabeth and Princess Marina of Kent dressed to impress.

Prince Louis is going to be a heartbreaker!

Has Camilla stopped styling her hair?

A tough broad and a royal geek.

Charles is one of the few Windsors who never had a brief period of beauty when young. Elizabeth was an attractive young woman and Phillip a strikingly handsome young man, yet their genes combined in just the wrong way with Charles.

R14, That biography of Princess Alice is really fascinating!

There was a time when Charles looked half decent, almost handsome. I can't remember exactly when - maybe during the time he was married to Diana - but he looked kind of hot in his polo duds r19. for example.

R15 Did you know Marina and Elizabeth couldn't stand each other?

[quote] Little curvy 5ft 4 Meghan is hardly manly.

Megs curvy? Bwahahahahahahaha! Think not, delusional one.

As the other poster noted, her body is shaped like a barrel. And lately, it’s even more emphasized than ever: like a pork barrel.

Folks in the (US) fashion industry have even coined a term for her body shape: “pork barrel Markle”.

Diana on the Palace balcony after her wedding.

The Queen and Philip with their four children in 1971.

What I want to know is where Charles's famous ears come from. Phillip has normal ears, so one has to wonder what the Queen's look like under her carefully sculpted 'do.

R16 - Lordy, Prince Louis looks like a child film star in that photo!

In the photo of the Queen Mother with Princess Marina, she is wearing one of those highway-man style hats that she often did to give herself more height. Despite the sweet arm-through, the two did not get on that well, and Marina was said to have been intimidated by Elizabeth's "serene professionalism" at royalling, and to have once called her "that common little Scottish girl" (before, of course, having to curtsy to her). This looks like it might be post-1942 when Marina was widowed when Prince George of Kent's life ended in a plane crash, so perhaps things had softened by then.

Odd, I could swear Diana put the veil back over her face in that photo, despite it being taken after the wedding.

And you can see there how those huge sleeves turned Diana into a giant square from the back . . .

OP is a racist troll and starts one Markle thread after the next. He’s made the majority of comments in this thread. Ignore is not his friend. He’s on Muriel’s ban list. Another thread to be closed.

R29, the only troll in here is you. Blocked.

Am also blocking r29, who already has their own thread floating around here so am not sure when they came in here except to stir trouble. The name-calling and insults are most tedious.

Charles comes in for blame from the Sun's editorial for failing to keep Andrew, Harry and Meghan in line

"If he can't lead his own family then how will he be able to provide leadership to the UK and the Commonwealth?"

It's blistering to everyone but the Queen, Wills and Kate.

In fairness, being King is probably easier than being a father.

Charles probably was no more capable of telling Harry he couldn't marry Meghan, than Elizabeth was of telling Charles he shouldn't marry Diana, or her sister, Margaret, that she couldn't marry Townsend (she didn't, it was left to advisors to "advise" the Princess of the consequences of such a marriage, Elizabeth never at any time tried to force Margaret in one direction or the other).

I think Charles feels very guilty for marrying Diana, whose mental issues well predated her marriage to Charles; he should have, he probably thinks, seen them and broken the relationship off), and which have obviously taken root in his younger son. So I suspect Charles feels guilty on two fronts: choosing a wife whose worst traits were passed on to his younger son, and not being able to help Harry.

Parents stopping adult children from marrying a spouse of choice carries its own set of perils and bitter recriminations. I'll give Charles the benefit of the doubt on the likely success of having told Harry to ditch the grifter or else.

But the article is partly right: someone has to be seen to be at the controls at this point, because it's obvious to a child that it isn't the Queen - how long can a monarchy survive with a lame duck monarch?

Funny graphic:

Funny graphic:

I don’t understand the title of this thread.

r33 You're right except I don't think anyone saw the Harkle - or the Diana - situation coming. Diana seemed to only start losing it during the honeymoon. They were alarmed enough that they put her on antidepressants then, which was a really rare occurrence in 1980's Britain (antidepressants were seriously frowned upon in the UK until relatively recently).

Likewise, most people in the UK were very happy about Harry marrying Meghan: he seemed happy, she seemed nice, her being mixed race is an asset to the family in that it showed the family moving with the times, and she was used to red carpets etc so she seemed a great pick from the point of view of handling media exposure. I'm sure everyone in the family was also enthusiastic about Meghan for all these reasons - until her destructive diva side began to show.

r36, It's the 4th part of the Sussex- Windsor-Cambridge thread.

Thanks, I get it. I sometimes think that something is obvious to everyone but me.

R36 - Sussex, Windsor, Cambridge, Part Four.

At this point, the Queen's refusal to retire seems more selfish than anything else. She should have bowed out 5 years ago: Charles isn't wildly popular, but he isn't hated, either. It's clear she's over everything but the most basic Queening duties. Nobody should be ruling in their late eighties: The only reason monarchies never had mandatory retirement ages is that hardly anybody lived that long in previous centuries.

Agreed, r41. The Queen is not coming out of this looking good either. Maybe it's just her age but also, she's famously adverse to confrontation, opting most of the time for a quiet life. Sometimes that's fine, but this past year /two years has not been one of those times.

If this kind of criticism results in losing Charles as an ally, the Sussexes really are sunk: they either cut the crap and play ball, or leave.

If anything has shown the need for the Queen to, at last, do the previously unthinkable, this year is it.

And Meghan's "preparedness" for public scrutiny was highly exaggerated. She was a C-list actress, she didn't appear on red carpets, her face wasn't on magazine covers until the Vanity Fair piece when she let the cat out of the bag in the last sentence of the article, doing an end-run around the Palace, she never had anything like the scrutiny the royals have.

And, allegedly, William did see through her quickly, and even Charles warned his son that if he married someone dramatci, constant drama would be his fate.

So I don't think it wasn't that no one saw through Meghan, I think it was that they figured that as the sixth in line, and needing to be anchored, Harry might as well take Meghan and it would all come out in the wash. It wasn't till after the engagement and the weddinge preparations that they began to see just how narcissistic and unready for royal life she was.

It's not how many red carpets you've been on - suitability for this life depends on two things: an authentic belief in the institution itself, and temperament.

Agreed, r43. I just think that, on paper, Meghan looked like a really positive addition to the BRF. It's staggering to think of how much initial goodwill she has thrown away with both hands, and how quickly the public sentiment turned from warm acceptance to absolute loathing. And formerly beloved Harry. Everyone was so happy for them, and now, people seem to want them to disappear entirely and for good.

R44 - I do agree with your first thought, and why it didn't play out the way it did for Princess Angela of Licthenstein or Princess Alexandra of Denmark (the first Eurasian woman to marry into a reigning European royal family - she retained the good will of the family and the Danes even after the marriage didn't work out), is too bad.

But that's what's so odd - it's another parallel with Harry's parents' marriage: Diana looked perfect on paper, too. Young, "innocent", beautiful, charming, aristocratic family pedigree, thoroughly English . . . what could go wrong?

Wouldn't it be breathtaking if the Queen decided that as she raised Andrew, she is partly responsible for the ghastly mess, and uses THAT as an excuse to step aside, throwing herself on the pyre, as it were, in hopes of allaying the criticism and giving the BRF a new start.

That would put the cat amongst the pigeons - talk about sacrifice for the good of the Thing itself!

But what would she be called? Another Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother?

Can we have an anointed Queen Mother and King Charles III?

Queen Beatrix of The Netherlands accepted a demotion to Princess when she stepped aside for Willem and Maxima.

I believe Juan Carlos and Sofia are still referred to as King and Queen.

Anyone know?

[quote]But that's what's so odd

It's not that odd if you consider how short their courtship was. Like 15 months or less, from meeting to engagement. Not much time, esp when you're marrying into a vastly complex corporate outfit like the BRF with all its rules and strictures.

William and Kate dated 10 years before hitching. And it was still overwhelming for her when she joined.

r46 not gonna happen. The Windsors aren't the Bourbons or the Dutch, who've made it a firm tradition for the monarch to abdicate at a certain age. TQ will be monarch until the end.

Doesn't mean she has to still be fully in control, there are plans in place for that (Regency) which imo will be moved up timeline-wise.

[quote]Can we have an anointed Queen Mother and King Charles III?

No. There's only one anointed Head of the Church of England.

I suppose she could be dowager queen.

There is a huge difference between the British Monarch and the other Kings and Queens on the Continent in that the British monarch is anointed "by God". None of the others are. That distinction is taken seriously by the Queen and all her forbears. It means, among other things, that the Queen feels she was chosen by God, and it is not for her to step down because that decision is up to God to make (through her death).

It sounds very strange in our secularised world, but it's why the Queen will never officially step down.

Here's some insight into the anointing and how it is considered a genuinely "sacred" moment, in the full sense of the word.

r49 dowager Queen is a former Queen consort, like the Queen Mother was. QEII is Queen Regnant, or queen in her own right.

It's no wonder younger women are indifferent to Kate. She might as well have time travelled here from the 1950s. Meghan, with her successful career in acting and her popular life style blog, is so much more inspirational and modern.

Hilarious that the Kate stans here think that Kate and Bald parading the reluctant third in line, glum little goblin faced George, will cheer up the nation. Neither George nor hatchet faced Charlotte inspire any kind of hope or joy. Louis already has a sybaritic look and will grow up to be another Andrew.

For gawd's sake r54, if you're going to spam the board with duplicate posts, at least change them up so they seem somewhat original in thought and syntax. You just posted the exact same anti-Cambridge screed in the other thread (your thread?). Please come up with something that inspires some discussion.

You're going to get tagged, I'm telling you.

Although if I'm being honest r54, the imagery of little Louis looking "sybaritic" had me lol. A two year old already looking like a hedonistic, dissolute reprobate. Where do you get this stuff?

(^^ same poster at r55 and r56)

R55, you've been telling me I'll get tagged for calling out you and the other resident racists for weeks now. I never do. I'm still here, a thorn in your side as you attack a young biracial mother, month after month, year after year.

Muriel, this is yet another Klan thread. Please shut it down, as you have dozens of others. They're all broke bitches so a paywall will do the job.

'Although if I'm being honest [R54], the imagery of little Louis looking "sybaritic" had me lol. A two year old already looking like a hedonistic, dissolute reprobate. Where do you get this stuff?'

Did you see his full, pursed lips? A regular little Lord Byron.

well r58 we'll still be here as a thorn in your own side as we continue to discuss your Goddess Meghan Duchess of Sussex, month after month, year after year. No one's going anywhere.

[quote]Muriel, this is yet another Klan thread. Please shut it down, as you have dozens of others. They're all broke bitches so a paywall will do the job.

But where will you post your unhinged screeds? You know you love it here.

R60, you will start up another, but I know how much it frustrates you when the moderators crack down on you.

I’ve been watching “The Crown”, up to half of Season Two. It’s so weird to think about Markle joining that crew.

Wrongo r60. I've never started a royal thread here. This ain't my thread.

And the WM has always left threads here to post. I've never been here a day where there isn't a royal thread to post on.

not sure they're going to go that far in time r62. Does anyone know how far in the timeline that show intends to go?

The Windsors (ITV?) was a great satirical take. Their ep on the Sussex wedding was one for the ages.

Here he is, the pouting baby Bacchus with his intense stare. He seems to have escaped the Middleton eyebag curse.

R64, I didn’t mean a Markle character joining the show portraying the most recent events... just that these are historical figures and fast-forward to a few years ago, and here’s this cheesy bimbo part of the story.

Well that makes sense r66.

I think they airbrushed them out there r65 (the eyebags).

"The Crown" is lots of fun. But it fills in dialogue that it has no evidence for and taking it as gospel isn't a good idea. It's not a documentary.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Alpha Wills.

Alpha Wills.

Alpha Wills, indeed. The DM has a piece up today that proclaims that William was one of the three voices calling for Andrew to be cut off completely.

Also, as noted on the other thread, the Express has a piece up quoting a new YouGov poll for the SUN showing that only 38% of the public support any more public funding for the Sussexes, but 60% in favour of some public funding for the Cambridges, and sliding popularity for Meghan but increasing popularity for Kate - Meghan is seen as not having been an asset to the BRF, but Kate is seen as a great asset to same. The Queen, somewhat surprisingly given how badly she has "handled" her family miscreants (which is to say, not at all), remains at 80% approval from the public.

There are also quite a few media outlets now calling for Charles to step up before it's too late.

YouGov is no fly by night operation, for those unfamiliar with it. It's one of the biggest polling organisations in the world. This is another warning shot across the bows of the Queen, Charles, and the Sussexes, who despite all the money they have cost the public and Charles in PR and communications staff, keep fucking it up; they are so completely tone-deaf it beggars description.

My guess is that the Sussex's PR has ceased to care what the British public think, and is now aimed at the American audience, for obvious reasons, that poll illustrating the reason why. No PR operation that was interested in retaining the good will of the BRF would have released yet another story about the allegedly on hiatus Duchess sticking the knife between the BRF's ribs by pretending to be so horrified by Andrew's interview. This from a woman who by all odds fucked more men for opportunity than Andrew could shake his pecker at.

It just shows how much smarter boring Kate was than trendy Meghan.

And yet, according to this new, highly accurate (your claim) YouGov poll, Harry is still the second most popular Royal after the Queen, r72. I’m sure you’ll now call me a sugar, even though I hate all of the royals, because it doesn’t fit your narrative, and you still are hoping somehow that Harry falls in love with you.

The ruthless Mountbatten blood is coming out full force in William, who is trying to protect his future and his children's future from the onslaughts of worthless trashy relatives.

Good for him.

Not according to the poll for The Sun, R73:

[quote] Princes William and Harry are the nation’s favourite royals, both viewed in a positive light by 81 per cent. They pip the Queen, on 80 per cent, into third. Fourth in popularity, with a 77 per cent rating, is Duchess of Cambridge Kate. However, only 44 per cent believe Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, has had a positive influence.

"Shock Poll: Meghan Markle and Prince Harry snubbed as majority say they should not get public funding"

R85, that poll shows William and Harry as the most popular royals. Did I miss something? My point being—Harry is extremely popular.

Harry's continued popularity coupled with Meghan's sliding popularity indicates that the British public largely attributes the Sussex's missteps to Meghan. I thought Harry's popularity would also show a decline as it's clear he's fully on board with her.

R77, Harry is one of the most popular royals, but only 38% of the public wants to fund the Sussexes. Make of it what you will.

That makes sense, r79. The people who they feel deserve to be funded are all in the direct line to the throne. Harry might be popular but people, when it comes to their pocketbook, certainly don’t want to spend more than they have to. It `funny, though, that Charles is only at 51%, and he’s the direct heir.

R30=racist cunt.

Thanks, R80. That should have been obvious to me.

'And yet, according to this new, highly accurate (your claim) YouGov poll, Harry is still the second most popular Royal after the Queen, [R72]. I’m sure you’ll now call me a sugar, even though I hate all of the royals, because it doesn’t fit your narrative, and you still are hoping somehow that Harry falls in love with you.'

Meghan has remained the same at 46% approval. Kate is the same too. The haters here were predicting that after the 'debacles' of Archie etc. Harry would have dropped to below William and Meg would be down in the 20s with the York sisters. Not the case.

'It's staggering to think of how much initial goodwill she has thrown away with both hands, and how quickly the public sentiment turned from warm acceptance to absolute loathing. And formerly beloved Harry. Everyone was so happy for them, and now, people seem to want them to disappear entirely and for good'.

Shut the fuck up you silly hallucinating bitch. Stop spinning these infantile Wattpad worthy narratives. From the latest You Gov polls, taken this month, Harry still has 68% approval, second only to the queen, and Meghan is still at 46%, as she was in May.

Nobody cares about a one off poll which surveys a few chavvy Sun readers

I remember the Klan gals here saying these yougov polls were the ONLY ones that mattered, and waiting eagerly for them to update in November as they expected to see the demonic Meghan drop from the 40s to the 20s. Here they are and of course the Klan are ignoring them as Meghan is still at 46% approval, the same as Charles, and Harry is still at 68%, above the bald one and his surrendered wife.

Muriel is about and has paywalled the racist Gowns of the BRF, where the Klan were racially profiling Meghan and body shaming her for having a rounder torso than the masculine beanpole Kate.

Before I block you and move on, just want to say - quit stirring the shit, R86.

R87, you're not on Twitter, you silly cow. You've been saying you've blocked me since May. Oddly, you always read my posts and get offended.

No one said, and I certainly didn't, that Harry was at the bottom of the barrel. But he used to come in first, even ahead of the Queen, so his popularity has slid. But as Meghan is his wife and share in the public funding he has been on the receiving end of for years, it's a bit specious to say that his public image isn't in trouble: she's his wife.

If the poll says that Harry's wife comes well below the other senior royals, and only 38% think the Sussexes should continue to receive public funding, how does pointing out that Harry slid from first to second makes any real difference, or undermines the real thrust of the ypoll?

Harry is married to an incresasingly disliked wife and the objection to public funding for the Sussexes by a majority does, ipso facto, mean Harry, too. So his second-place finish in the popularity polls, where he held first place before he married Meghan, is essentially meaningless. They may "like" him, but a majority don't want to pay him any longer - which is, realistically, a far more damaging statistic.

And lastly, the percentage betwee Harry and William is so negligible as also to be nearly meaningless.

Those pointing out Harry's second place as a means of discrediting a poll that carries clear implications for the BRF, and Harry and his wife. is just plain wishful thinking.

Someone on my ignore had four posts in a row! That is damn obsessive.

Block the troll & his minioins and do not make it easier for him to try to get threads shut down by arguing with him/them.

He is a troll, R90, perhaps a paid SS lackey, has been here for years shilling for a boybander and getting threads shut down. I cannot see 77-86. It is possible that they are paid per post. Everyone from politicians to cereals manufacturers to celebs hires social media managers, SS has some pretty recognizable tactis/scripts.

When Angelina hit declining fortunes, the amount of social media booters and shills was said to drop. We can only hope that day comes soon for the SS duo. That shady foundation is a likely source of funding, but they will need it for other things if cut off by the UK taxpayer.

R91, Yes, in the past, I never blocked individual posters, but I've found it impossible to read these threads when they fill up with so many ugly insults.

It can be interesting to go back and review the posts of those blocked. It is sometimes startling to see how many posts they have on a given thread as well as some really ugly insults.

It is a job, R93, and part of that is trying to drive off posters due to the negativity and spamming and to get threads shut down. He/they also start new threads early, often when one goes to subscribers only. Their posts stand out too much when traffic slows, plus multiple threads is another tactic to trigger closing.

The insults are similar re: the Cambs and on the boybander threads, it is a tactic.

There is never just one troll/shill/cleaner posting, they use more than 1 IP or talk to each other. Blocking a few causes a large number of posts to vanish and makes the thread much more pleasant.

R86 - another moron deservedly being blocked.

Bye, looney! <3

R21 I grew up in a town where they play a lot of polo. Polo uniforms make everyone look good.

Blocked R86 long ago. She and her ilk are by all odds paid shills. DL has acquired a reputation on sites like Celebitchy for not falling into line with their worship of Meghan and what someone on bannedbycelebitchy (and that's quite an interesting site) called their nearly pathological hatred of Kate. Someone on CB issued a "call to action" to come onto sites like DL and flood it with pro-Meghan comments and/or get threads critical of Meghan shut down.

So beware. Intent to censor opinion is active on this site.

One other thing I found out on a random visit to bannedbycelebitchy, is that Kaiser has become aware that the site was becoming known as a febrile hate site where Kate is concerned, and has been dragged for it on other sites besides CB - she issued a warning this week that “People making disgustingly negative comments about Kate will get banned.” No one believes that, of course - the bannedbycelebitchy folk claim all it means is bashing Kate for so much as breathing in nicer language.

You know the expression, "No honour amongst thieves"? Well, the same is true of social media and gossip sites. WIth the sails of publci opinion in Britain tacking against the Sussexes, even Kaiser has slipped in some criticisms of how the Sussexes are handling themselves, and issued the warning about negative posts about Kate.

If Kate turns out not to be in the club again, does anyone think Kaiser and her minions will retract the vicious shit they posted at the idea that she might be? Like, she's just trying to avoid working again, or she wants to show Meghan up, or the BRF made her do it so Harry could be pushed down the line of succession, or the BRF needs happy news . . .

Anything but 1) Kate might not be pregnant and she might really have had a sick child at home that she wanted to stay with, and 2) it's clear she enjoys motherhood and loves children.

I do not understand why certain chronic troublemakers are not given the boot off this board. But that's all I'll say, and I don't think we should belabor the topic anymore. Just block and go.

I for one have been enjoying the Gowns of the BRF thread, which is mostly dish about frocks. A few random observations about the figures of the royal ladies, but pretty much all in the context of what works sartorially and what doesn't.

So that Virginia is giving an interview, huh? Whew....it's all a mess, and sad. This is not the usual fun gossip about bickering and backstabbing.

It's a shame a fewy crazies have to ruin a fantastically entertaining topic like royal gowns, wihch naturally bring into discussion body type.

Charles gets back from Down Under tomorrow, and I imagine more of the proverbial will hit the fan.

Watch this space . . .

I can still open the royal gowns thread.

R101, I went to check it out, and for the first time, I ran into a paywall. I've been posting today, but apparently I hadn't renewed my subscription, so now I can post there if I want. But I never actually knew what a DL paywall looked like until today.

Well, it would be nice if someone could open it, as it wasn't all that full and discussion of clothes as clothes seems to have returned . . .

Indeed, R103, aside from some very slight off-track Meghan and Kate negativity, it was a good, fairly anodyne discussion.

Thanks Kum.

R101 - The thread is open, but only to paying subscribers. So nonsubscribers can open it and look at the comments, but not comment themselves. It's a recent phenomenon: popular threads starting out as open to everyone, and then at some point suddenly being limited to paying members only.

You seem to have missed the part where I said the troll is on my ignore list. Reading is fundamental to creating alliances, rather than chiding and instructing those already sympathetic as though you're an Andrew HRH figure yourself chiding and condescension too to the lessers, you know?

[quote]Block the troll & his minioins and do not make it easier for him to try to get threads shut down by arguing with him/them. He is a troll, [R90], perhaps a paid SS lackey

Here we have a classic example of a Welp Troll post. The Welp Troll is a paranoid schizophrenic who is convinced all the positive posts on any threads are made by PR shills or bots. He's been here since 2012. One of the most delusional and most warped DL trolls.

'He is a troll, [R90], perhaps a paid SS lackey, has been here for years shilling for a boybander and getting threads shut down. I cannot see 77-86. It is possible that they are paid per post. Everyone from politicians to cereals manufacturers to celebs hires social media managers, SS has some pretty recognizable tactis/scripts.

When Angelina hit declining fortunes, the amount of social media booters and shills was said to drop. We can only hope that day comes soon for the SS duo. That shady foundation is a likely source of funding, but they will need it for other things if cut off by the UK taxpayer.'

The BRF gowns thread was popular, with a lot of different posters rather than just the same ones. Murs tends to paywall those. There was (still is) a really good discussion there, with lots of good photos.

It was not in the least a racist thread and no one body shamed anyone. The DoS was getting compliments there, for some of her looks.

When do we predict the next round of H&M p.r./press to start? I don't think she can wait until Wed. (arriving at her mother's house, for example) to stay quiet. She surely has something up her sleeve for Mon or Tues of this week.

Do you think Sparkle, Dim and Archie will be staying with her mother for the 6 week break?

Will other family be sharing Thanksgiving and/or Christmas dinner with them?

Aw, you Klan gals who dub Meghan a narcissist really can't cope when she goes off radar, can you? SIX WEEKs, hoes.

That was an easy block.

R113, you claimed to have blocked me back in June. Shame you could not bring yourself to.

[QUOTE] Do you think Sparkle, Dim and Archie will be staying with her mother for the 6 week break

No, they're currently in a luxurious and top secret villa close to the ocean. They're probably planning to travel a little and Doria will join them for some of it. Doria's house is too publicly accessible to stay at.

Sunshine Sachs working overtime today! We should report this festering boil to them, since she's done nothing but bring further disrespect to her client, who never merited much respect in the first place.

R110 - Mate, where have you been? It never stopped. First, we got "friends" who spoke to the primary Meghan Mouthpiece, PEOPLE Magazine, talking about how no one had checked in to see how they were doing during the Andrew Crisis. Then, we had Meghan's "camp" leaking t hat Meghan wanted to "curl up under a table" at Andrew's remark in the interview that sex was a positive act for men, and now, we have in the DM another "source" talking to (surprise!) PEOPLE aboheut how Meghan knows she's being pitted against Kate, which Meghan finds "challenging" because Kate was "groomed" to be the future monarch's wife . . .

You really thought she'd go quietly?

The only person pitting Meghan against Kate was Meghan herself. She's envious, competitive, doesn't like the idea that someone so close by outranks her and always will, leaked nasty stories through Lainey about Kate (and the Cambridge children) and she consistently showed herself up for a little limelight stealing. The reason she refused to do the Baby Wave from the steps of the hospital for five minutes after Archie was born was because she was concerned that she wouldn't look as good as Kate did doing the same with her babies.

And Kate wasn't "groomed". She dated William for eight years, went to the same college, and lived with him before marrying him. She certainly was brought up in English ways, and she probably picked up quite a good bit of What Not To Dobut while they were dating, but to say she was "groomed" is not only absurd, but offensive, as if she were a 14th century pawn in the Wars of the Roses. And in England, the term now carries other offensive undertones. Google Rotherham Grooming Scandal if you weren't aware of that.

Kate, like Meghan, knew what she wanted and went for it, behaving as she did so in the manner most likely to get her to her goal.

Meghan doesn't seem to realise that the "friends" she's using to 1) keep her name out there while she "retires" for six weeks, and 2) keep plying her "victim" narrative for her so when she leaves she can blame everyone but not herself for being bad at being royal, are only persuading the BRF and the British public that the Sussexes are dead wood and should be pruned post haste. Every time she opens her mouth through her shills, she manages to insult someone in the BRF of the BRF generally.

These little leaks, insulting, whingeging in tone, uncaring about the long-term impact on Harry's relationship with his blood family, are Meghan hoisting the Sussex's EXIT flag little by little.

The family will be only too glad to see the back of her.

R15 - I think Prince Louis looks exactly like Michael Middleton.

"Someone on CB issued a "call to action" to come onto sites like DL and flood it with pro-Meghan comments and/or get threads critical of Meghan shut down."

R97 - Your post is a falsehood. The call to action was to invade the The Daily Fail not the DataLounge. The call to action was by a poster of the CB commentariat NOT Kaiser. CBers, who visit the Datalounge "have no problems" with the Datalounge. Why are you making stuff up?

R117.

MM hasn't given a statement or an interview. People speculates. If this was speculation about Kate, you'd be very quick to shoot it down.

Hear, hear, R117. That woman is transparent, basic and exhausting. They really need to Sweden the Harkles.

[QUOTE] The family will be only too glad to see the back of her.

This will be a PR disaster for the BRF. The first biracial Princess of the UK, a new mother, driven out of the country, taking beloved Harry with her?

Your hatred has addled your brain.

This is somewhat exhausting to write over and over, but despite the wishes of some of the posters here, the BRF will not “Sweden” Harry and Meghan, nor will they step away. Seriously MM will give up an HRH and Duchy to be an Instagram influencer? Have you all lost your minds?

MM hasn’t been seen in months (except once), so the transparent hatred is apparent. No matter what she does, she’ll never get on the good side of these posters. Now, I wonder why?

And btw I’m no fan of any member of the BRF.

Sure you're not, R123. LOL.

Well, r124, at least I’m not a loser frau. There is no place in today’s modern world for a royal family, especially not one filled with mediocrities. But I have no illusions as to why certain ones are held in more disdain.

This is DL, not frau-ville, so get a clue.

If you quit biting and simply block them, they scream impotently into the void. Just sayin. The arguing is beyond tiresome.

So what’s new at the Palace?

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Yes he is, R127. I wonder what kind of wedding we’ll get. Anything can happen in six months or whatever.

Edo is a little guy, though. Very compact.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

A lovely photo of the Queen and Philip with Charles and Anne.

The Duchess of York (later the Queen Mum) with Elizabeth (current Queen) and Princess Margaret Rose.

r117 Exactly correct. Best comment on the thread.

The ring collection of Meghan.

R123 - Actually, she has been seen in months. You really should carry out more research. The African tour was in October, the Remembrance Field appearance on Sat., 12 November, and the Cenotaph shortly after. How is that "months".

The dislike is transparent because Markle's disregard for the family she used and then ditched (sound familiar?) is transparent.

When the Sussexes eventually make their intention to take the money and run to freer climes arrives, we'll be back wondering where you are.

And there is no "duchy" the way there is for Charles and later William. The Sussex ducal title comes with no lands, revenues, tenants, etc.

Cheers.

Tacky, tacky, tacky. She betrays her trash roots with her thumb ring and also with her zodiac necklaces

Camilla has to have a puff even when riding. LOL.

Speak for yourself R135. Meghan ditching that train wreck of a reality show she came from makes perfect sense to me. I roll my eyes at her for her complete inability to play the Royal Game or consider longterm consequences.

Odd, she wasn't ditching her Dad before she met Harry and posted messages on social media calling herself "Your Bean" and extolling his virtues as a father - until, that is, when she started dating royalty and somehow, then . . . he was off the list.

Rolled eyes indeed. The train wreck of a family shouldn't have included the father who put her through school so she wouldn't come out with debts, and whose brother pulled strings to get Meghan into that UN internship program after she flunked the exam . . .

But hey, who's counting?

Meghan's accessory rings look like something you would buy from Claire's for a 12 year-old. Yes, I would say the same thing if Kate wore them.

Yeah, Meghan loved, loved, loved casting herself as a daddy's girl, the precious, beloved bean on her blog until she realized that having an obese, slovenly, shambolic father walk her down the aisle wasn't quite the iconic look she was going for. Far better to have the future King of England do so. I'm still stunned she stood Charles up for his Cornwall documentary. That's seriously messed up. She has a habit of cutting out the men who make her lifestyle possible. It's bizarre.

R134, you know what they say about “beringedness”...

Wasn’t there something about the engagement ring? She had it refashioned with bigger stones? Or am I thinking of someone else?

The delicate rings are very Pinterest-y, and look cheap. But what can one do? One must wear what is sent and paid for.

R142-no, you're right. She had it redesigned. The irony being is that Harry confessed during the engagement interview that he designed it himself. He was quite pleased and proud and just a little shy about it. She's not particularly sentimental, is our Megs? That poor dumb fuck of a ginger.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R144-Meghan is a classic mean girl, full of venom and jealousy, who says things archly that, while the face aren't negative, are just dripping with criticism.

Kate was 29 and a college graduate when she married William. How is that not being a fully formed person? Sure, they dated earlier than that, but prior to the engagement she could have gotten out at any time. She chose this life and clearly enjoys it. She'll make a very good queen consort.

“Fully formed”? That sounds like some weird cult-speak. And as if she’s the arbiter. But she’s entitled to criticize away at the family she never had...

Women's liberation allowed women to make the best choices for themselves.

Whether directly or indirectly through "friends", a "true" feminist doesn't go knocking other women because they never had careers or because they like to stay home with her children. It does sound like "someone" hasn't "evolved" into a full person and it sure isn't Kate.

That's why I never go onto CB, R148. Those women constantly deride Kate for not having a career and putting motherhood and her marriage first. Call me crazy, but I though the point of feminism was for women to make their own decisions about what kinds of lives they want to lead.

R149 - You are incorrect. The majority of women who deride Kate (and not all women deride her) on CB deride her for being lazy and not wanting to work a full schedule of Royal Engagements. If you have three children (two of which are in school full time) you can work a full schedule with no problems if you have nannies and a full domestic staff as Kate does.

I think rather than being "wrong" as you claim, r150, r149 and r148 are specifically referring to posters like you.

In fact, r149 and r148 are exactly right.

R150, thinking that a woman needs a to have a “career” to have any value is the exact same thing as thinking a woman should be barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen.

Most working women aren’t climbing the corporate ladder to become CEOs, so you’re shitting on them, too.

Didn’t I read that the Suitcase Girls were Feminist Theory majors?

[quote]The first biracial Princess of the UK, a new mother, driven out of the country, taking beloved Harry with her?

Racial post - Muriel!

That's a whole lot of funky weird looking rings at r134.

Were any worn more than once? except for the engagement and eternity rings.

According to YouGov's most recent "royal popularity" poll, Meghan has slid to 8th place, behind every single other senior royal, includ Pss. Anne, and Camilla and Charles. Approval ratings for Harry and Willian are only 2% apart, and the first four are the Queen, Harry (he was first last year), William, and Kate, with approval ratings of the last three with approval ratings of 64% and higher; Meghan's are at 46%, tied with that old bat, Pss. Anne.

Whatever those highly paid PR and Communications ladies are doing, they're doing it wrong. It not only hasn't helped, it has hurt.

I guess the British public doesn't necessarily subscribe to the idea that all women whould be Sherman tanks plunging down the career path, and that the number of engagements isn't really the point for a future Queen consort, carrying our the role appropriately is , , ,

I notice that at no point has CB ever addressed Meghan's sliding down the polls pole. The posters there still talk about the Cambridges being "jealous" of Meghan's popularity.

Only trouble is, the Cambridges are more popular than she is by a good bit. They just won't talk about that on CB.

Christ, she isn't being driven out, she arranged matters so that she could leave in a couple of years with her brand, her title, her million-dollar wardrobe, her global platform, and not have to do the boring royal thing any longer.

If she didn't want to leave, she'd have been a bit more conscious of the role of a constitutional monarchy (pssst: it's not to change the world) and not stuck two fingers up to the institution, the British government, and the Queen and Charles.

That whingeing documentary was Meghan's Andrew Morton book car crash. After the Morton book, they kicked Diana out - and she was blonde, blue-eyed, the Princess of Wales and the mother of a future King.

So don't worry, Mary - they kick out the white, blue-eyed arists too if they blot their copybooks often enough.

James Middleton gave an interview where he admitted to struggling with depression, and having sought counseling. And he casually mentioned that Catherine had joined him during some of this therapy sessions. THAT is an example of being committed to one's family. Not some refrigerator magnet philosophy posted on Instagram. Back before Harry married, and he used to be the third wheel to William and Kate, it was obvious that she felt a lot of affection for Harry, and he enjoyed her company: I think she took sort of an older sister role to him. That's why his later talking about his rift with William feels so unnecessary and hurtful. I'm a gay man with an older straight brother, who has always been my greatest protector. We've had arguments, of course, but we've always been close and supportive.

After that debacle of a Wimbledon appearance, with the 'no photos' nonsense, the next time she appeared at Wimbledon, it was with Kate (and Pippa) flanking her, trying to change the 'optics'. Kate has shown she's a team player. I don't how it benefited Pippa, other than to support her sister.

James is basically the Rob Kardashian of the Middleton clan. Both his sisters married EXTREMELY well and he's...around.

Omid Scobie has provided the latest on Archie's eating habits, for those who were wondering.

Nicknames as legal names is so awkward. He's gonna be 40 years saying "Hello, I'm Archie"

Imagine him introducing himself:

"Hello, I am Archie, Earl of Dumbarton!"

I didn't care to read the article R160 has provided. Is he able to eat meat and the like now? As mentioned - I can't be arsed to read the article.

The thing this kid's moron parents should care about, however, is his visibly lazy eye.

When will he be old enough for eye surgery? It's really needed in this case, me thinks.

R163, She needs to consult with Sophie, the Countess of Wessex, who is patron of several charities concerning vision, stemming from Lady Louise's problems with astigmatism. Lady Louise has made a vast improvement from her early childhood. And, before I get called out for being too invested, I grew up with astigmatism, and it took many years of corrective lenses to correct my crossed eyes. I went to bed wearing my glasses as a wee lad of 4 years old.

I'm Omid Scobie - now helping Meghan keep herself in the spotlight by this time releasing a nauseating story about how Archie is being weaned and on solid foods!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - !!!!

Can you imagine Kate Middleton doing that?

Well, well, what have we here: ANOTHER Meghan story, this time about Archie being on solid food, leaked by Meghan's Obedient Servant, Omid Scobit.

Because she just sooooo needs a rest from all this and she needs her privacy and she wants the bloody media to leave her alone!

Let's see, we had the "No one is checking In" "Curl up under a table" "Pitted Against Kate Who Was Groomed [sic] For This" . . . and now a story about Archie.

Sure, she hates the bloody tabloids. But what she hates even more is the possibility of being ignored by them.

No one cares that Archie is eating solid food, Meghan. We care about you doing your job properly and respecting the Queen, the monarchy, the British government, and the British taxpayers.

Wow, Master Archie aka The Earl of Dumbarton can eat solid food now. Praise the Lord!

Seriously, did we ever learn about the Cambridge kids being able to eat solid food? I guess we didn't. And there's a certain reason for that.

Hint: William and Kate, unlike the other two, are decent parents neither unnecessarily dragging their kids into the limelight nor using their offspring as props.

The Mail story on the People story was a total confirmation that Meghan Markle is a despicable, manipulative stupid, stupid creature.

First, the whole show is in the soup thanks to Uncle Andy. This is no time to feed the beast. But she did.

Second, she's supposed to be on her break in California. This is no time to feed the best. But she did.

Third, the great feminist is implicitly criticizing the choice of another woman - hardly empowering. But she did.

Fourth, the lanugage, given the Uncle Andy context, was so low. "Grooming." Could you get any more obvious.

I used to think she was a fast, ambitious piece of work, in over her head, proud and clueless in her ignorance in equal measure. This was appalling. What a terrible person.

Say what you will about Diana, and I’ve called her crazy many a time, but in the end you had to love her. This video brought my cold heart to tears.

r167 Do you think that this "We're being pitted against each other" MM story is worse than the"Prince Andrew's interview made me want to crawl under the table" MM story? They are both pretty bad and both sent during her 6 week 'downtime'..

Not commenting on whether MM sent out the story, but why would anyone think she's 'being pitted' against Kate? Kate is the future Queen Consort, Meghan is the Duchess of Sussex and that's as far as she'll go. They aren't in competition, why can't people see that?

The entire purpose of the working members of the BRF are to support and SHORE up the current monarch and their wife/husband. Everything rotates around them, and keeping them on the throne, since without that none of the rest of them are "royal" anymore. No more duchies, no more vast funding, royal jewels, palaces, etc. The other royals aren't there to make their own way along a divergent path, otherwise they need to go private and move along. Simple as that.

So many Klan members dancing round the fire, Muriel! Please paywall this.

There are stories in the Mail/People speculating about Kate's/William's/The Queen's opinions of Meghan and other royals, but the Klan ignore these bc they have no source except for a random 'friend'.

I've seen articles claiming the Camb kids were on solids too. The gossip press print all kinds of stupid stories, which you hypocritical whores dismiss because the royals concerned didn't give a statement/interview. But anything People prints is a 'leak', even though all these stories are absymal PR and not ones she would ever want to be associated with.

The reality is that Meghan hasn't been seen since early November. You chavs don't know if she's even in the US.

R169 - What they both are, and what is bad about them in equal measure, is that they are attacks on the BRF, without whom, after all, Meghan would still be a C-actress now pushing 40 and on the way to oblivion.

These stories are either MM's petty vengeance on people she thinks Done Her Wrong, in which case she and Harry should be pointed toward the EXIT door, or they are being put out there by people who WANT to make her look like a snotty ingrate. Either way, the sum at the bottom of the column for Meghan is a huge nought unless she really no longer cares what the BRF think. Given that PEOPLE Magazine is the original source of a couple of these recent stories, I'd say it's a split decision.

She cannot possibly think these are ingratiating her with the public, because it's quite clear they aren't.

So there are only two reasonable possibilities: she doesn't care about the Queen's, and Charles', and William's, reactions to these stories , one of which twists the knife in the BRF's back that Andrew stuck there, and one that virtually calls Kate a child-woman who couldn't think for herself when she hooked up with William and, after 8 years of a relationship, married him.

The whingeing No One Is Checking Up On Us! as the family deals with possibly the biggest scandal since the Abdication and the collapse of the Wales marriage, replays the already wearisome Woe Is Us narrative. The nauseating attempt to wrench the train back onto the Lovable Us track by using Archie and his organic foods blunders into the same self-absorbed trap: Meghan letting everyone learning how she can feed her kid the best of everything as she relaxed in her five-bedroom cottage at Windsor - and also assumes anyone cares, which really no one does.

So all these stories are damaging all the way around. The only real question is, is it Meghan's blindered view of good PR tactics, or is it Meghan figuring she's leaving, so she's keen to stick it to them?

There's an old medieval Nordic saying: "A sharp weapon is always a danger to the hand that wields it."

I don't seee how Harry and Meghan remain part of a family that she has, in her time-honoured fashion, already ruthlessly, in practice by these articles, if not yet technically, now ghosted, just the way she did her father.

The only difference is, this time, they're ghosting her, too, and they hold quite a few cards and the day will come when, after she's dropped Harry, Harry will wish he still had a family to turn to. He's not LaCa material.

Agree, R172. She's doing as much damage as she can, because she resents the family that gave her everything she never had. She resents that she didn't get the tiara and the lavish home she wanted, she resents being second to Kate, she resents Harry not getting the Duchy of Cornwall, she resents not being the ultimate star. I think she really did think she'd marry Harry - the "more popular" brother - and become Diana 2.0, international fashion icon and humanitarian with state dinners in couture gowns and glittering tiaras and endless flattering People Magazine covers. She thought the way she was treated on her wedding day - all cameras on her with a carriage ride and cheering crowds - would be her daily existence. It was a sharp wake-up call when that didn't happen, and she was furious at the injustice of it all. The "pitted against each other" story seems an acknowledgement of sorts that she's recognized her secondary status. I love that her ex-husband married an heiress - a younger woman, to boot - worth 200 million, while Harry is only worth around 20. Karma came for her big time.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

At nearly 40, Meghan's current status is literally the best she'll ever do. If she had any sense she'd acknowledge that and carve out a nice place for herself and Harry within the family. There is a need for a flashier, social justicier alternative to William and Kate, for the contrast if nothing else. If she'd dial down the whining and quit trying to compete with Kate and instead try to complement her sister-in-law, the family would eventually give her most of what she wants. Her bad behavior is what cost her the KP apartment, the HRH for her kid, and access to the best jewelry. If she bolts instead of buckling down, she's going to find herself in nowheresville in 5 years. The BRF will always take care of Harry, and that will probably extend to Archie, but it's been proven already that ex-wives are totally disposable to that clan.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R175-that's what's so mystifying. She literally could have had it all had she taken it slowly, followed protocol and listened to advisors. Had she been modest with the spending and been a team player she would have become immensely popular. I'm just gobsmacked at how badly she's messed it up. That's why I think she has to have some kind of mental illness. Most women in her shoes would have just gone along with the program and reaped the benefits.

Not ascribing this to any sort of machination, but even when the Sussexes are in hiding, stories about them abound.

No privacy! Ever!

Swipe for the life of Queen Victoria's daughter, Princess Helena.

And r163, I read it for you. Nothing remarkable about the Sussexes, but this gem at the end:

“ Mr Oliver wrote in his book 'Dinner at Buckingham Palace': “Mostly, the book remains blank, as the Queen is not fussy about food.”

On one occasion Her Majesty left a scathing note to a chef after she found a dead slug in her food.

The Queen removed the offending creature from her meal, tore out a piece of paper from the book and laid it on top.

Mr Oliver said: “Once, on a torn-off top sheet the footmen found the dead body of a slug.”

Beside it, she wrote: “I found this in the salad—could you eat it?” “

How mortifying!

Meghan's clearly a narcissist, but I think the biggest problem is that she didn't understand the culture she was entering, one with rules quite different from those of Hollywood. All married-ins, even Kate, struggle a bit, and the press always picks on the New Girl. The only way to survive is to do what Kate did: keep smiling, keep your mouth shut, and follow protocol. Eventually, everybody gets used to you, and then you can even start building affection with the public. Once you've established yourself and given the Royal you married his children, then you see the honors, jewels, and properties start rolling in.

Is it a modern way to live? Fuck no. But there are about a million books and documentaries out there to inform any Royal bride of exactly what she's marrying into. If Meghan didn't understand that, it's on her.

R179-The Sussexes aren't in hiding. Who do you think is leaking those stories? Archie's eating solid foods? That's Meghan giving Omid his marching orders. Meghan wanted to curl up under the table during the Andrew interview? Again, Meghan herself directed that. Meghan is pitted against Kate, but Meghan was a "full-formed" woman while Kate was "groomed." Again, Meghan. If she really wanted privacy, she'd just shut the fuck up, but she cannot deal with not being in the press constantly. Her ego won't allow it. And all she accomplishes is that with each story, people hate her more. Especially with the BRF imploding, these attempts make her look like an attention whore. The Sussexes probably thought Andrew would take the heat off them and they'd look a million times better by comparison. See-we're not pedophiles! But what happened is the press and public started saying, "Get rid of Andrew, and while you're at it the whinging scroungers."

This comment on Instagram sums Meg up nicely.

[quote]She's almost 40 years old merching rings for tweens

It will be good when she hits her mid 40s. Then they can't pull the young person crap anymore. I wonder if they are aware at how urgently their clock is ticking?

R175’s “ but it's been proven already that ex-wives are totally disposable to that clan.”

Wise words, but she will ignore that fact, as she has everything else she should have taken to heart.

It will be interesting when William and Kate are eventually crowned king and queen (if they make it). Will Meghan be reduced to being a very special royal correspondent on E to talk about the big day?

That's I don't get... of all people to pick a fight with she nails a popular figure with whom she can't compete and a future Queen. She's not Machiavelli, she's a Mean Girl.

Harry must be so stupid not to see through this.

R174, I notice the pics of the Yorkies are from Backgrid, the go to for z-list beach/pda type pap shots. Keeping classy and respecting the bereaved family there Fergie.

The deployment of the word groomed still sickens me today. So low. So obvious. I find it hard to think they will forgive that, probably more for the timing than anything. Does she think she's playing Diana's game? Because even Diana failed at that as much as she succeeded and Diana had different and superior strengths than Meghan Markle ever will.

Can Fergie ever go anywhere without grinning like an idiot? Probably not, she is an idiot.

MM is an idiot for playing these games right now. Charles and William are conferring on the future with regard to Andrew and if the reporting is 10% right in no mood to be generous. It is not hard to imagine they'll be discussing who's helpful and who isn't, generally. Bad time to put your hand up.

Meghan's actions are those of someone planning to bolt. She's raising her woke profile as much as she can to maximize opportunities once she leaves in the next year or so. What she doesn't realize is that public interest in her begins and ends with her Royal connections.

Heather Mills 2.0.

The BRF is such a model of familial dysfunction. If Kate does nothing but raise three relatively well-adjusted children, with two pursuing paying careers or other worthwhile endeavors , it will be a major accomplishment for the monarchy.

I truly admire the Duchess of Sussex.

PS - Meghan call me for advice.

I'm not sure they are a model of dysfunction. Their dysfunction just lands in the paper more than for most of us.

r182, That is the same for most of us. Start a new job and keep quiet and polite , work hard until you know and understand the cliques in the workplace and who is a gossip and who is important. We all do it , not in the public eye but we all conform in this way or we lose our jobs frankly. You don't demand to reform the company when you are the new intern. Basically, she is thick as shit.

Another royal event has been announced: the Duchess of Cambridge will join the Queen and other members of the Royal Family at a Reception hosted by the Queen on December 3rd for NATO leaders to mark the 70 years of the NATO alliance.

R179 - Oh, but you should assume machination. Those are all stories leaked by Meghan's PR team, through her "camp". She wants to be left alone but not forgotten. If their names really do disappear from sight for six weeks, they could wake up on Epiphany only to find that the UK public didn't miss them at all.

This is for the poster who keeps accusing critics of Meghan of being "the Klan". The quote below is from one of the sistahs on Liptsick Alley, a black gossip site, in which a site dedicated to unpopular opinions on Meghan have passed the 2,000 page mark:

"I disagree that MM would do anything for a do over. I believe everything is going according to her plans from the jump. She has Harry right where she wants him....isolated, aggrieved, and angry. He’s picked a fight with everyone on her behalf. And she has him on the way to LA. She’s started more shit in that family in the last 18 months.

The only thing she is trying to work out is the $$$$. And she has to do it fast because they are on a clock within the family..."

It might come as a surprise to the Meghan stans sent in here to disrupt threads not "favourable" to their heroine that quite a few of her "sistahs" don't like her, and see her as the same hard-boiled manipulative hypocrite that DLers do.

Exactly R201. I'm as mixed race as Meghan, I consider her family to be a dumpster fire of a reality show (waiting on more Sam headlines), but I'm baffled by her inability to play the long game. She seems committed to putting the wrong foot forward.

R202 - I don't think she was ever interested in what we think of as the long game. I think the poster on LSA nailed it: THIS is her long game. She got the fame, she got the name, now she can take it all and go home where no one tells her what to say and do, and she doesn't have to curtsy to King William and Queen Catherine someday.

In fairness, I think it was Harry's long game, too: find the right woman to sprinboard him out, and leave to trade on his name.

We just didn't know it.

Harry won't leave for good. He's worth even less than she is without the cachet of royal.

The flaw of Harry and Meghan's endgame, though, is that they are nothing without being working members of the BRF. If they leave, there will be a little novelty, but after that, they're rapidly approaching middle age, and neither is talented or intelligent enough on his or her own to rise to global rock star status. The dismal ratings of their two documentaries speak to this.

R203 but think how much better she'd be placed if she'd spent a year or two playing the game before "going rogue".

Diana had years of goodwill as a cushion before she started throwing grenades at The Firm. Meg has....nada

And Diana was also mother to the future king and titled to begin with. She was coming from a completely different place, something Meghan has been too stubbornly dim to grasp. She just thought, "The Panorama interview worked for Diana, it will work for me!" She never bothered to consider the years and years and years of public interest and drama that preceded it. What Meghan wants, Meghan wants now, and that is to her extreme detriment.

"After the Morton book, they kicked Diana out "

R157 - No, Diana wanted out on her terms which is not quite how it ended up. However, make no bones abut it. Diana wanted out.

R199 - Kate will be representing William at this one - he will apparently be back in the Middle East on that date. Ordinarily, I suppose Andrew would have been at it, as a Navy veteran, but . . . . I think this is a very dressy cocktail affair, not a tiara affair.

Exactly. Imagine if Diana had gone on the warpath in 82 or 83. Um...

R172 & R173 - I think you are both wrong. Meghan did not leak any "stories". The stories were leak Royal PR people to take attention off Andrew and the tabloids ran with the "stories" to see newspaper$ and generate revenue producing click$.

You type real smart, R212.

"She's raising her woke profile as much as she can to maximize opportunities once she leaves in the next year or so."

R193 - Meghan is not going anywhere and Meghan will be pregnant again in the next year or so. Also, Meghan is not leaking information through her friends. or through any other medium.

^And you know this how?

R212 - Should read:

R172 & R173 - I think you are both wrong. Meghan did not leak any "stories". The stories were leaked by Royal PR people to take attention off Andrew and the tabloids ran with the "stories" to sell newspaper$ and generate revenue producing click$.

Sorry, Having trouble with my keyboard

R215 - In the same way all other posters of the DataLounge commentariat know about all that they post regarding the BRF.

PLEASE. If Meghan's 'friends' were going to the press with untrue stories, or if the stories were planted to make her look bad (they weren't - the 'she thinks Andrew is vile' story was obviously planted to make her look GOOD, although it failed again because neither she nor her PR understand the UK or the concept of context), she'd have some mouthpiece, Omid or People etc., correct them. Those quotes in the Telegraph were obviously not only approved but likely written by MM herself.

Let's not forget Lettergate and my personal favorite, the PATHETIC attempt at a Pippa moment from her BFF at the wedding

Jessica Mulroney been showing up in little nothingy puff pieces in the DM lately, too. Some story about her 'ugly Xmas pjs' (or whatever I just saw the headline) a day or two ago, and others sown elsewhere throughout the media gossipscape. She's still trying to make it happen.

R219-that was a case where I was actually embarrassed for someone. Not a bit of originality. I also wondered if it's what Meghan was trying to pull off at Charles' garden party in honor of his birthday. That's when she did a ridiculous sashay up a few stairs. It looked ridiculous, and was, as the young 'uns say, too "try hard." What neither grasped was that Pippa went viral precisely because it was an innocent, unintentional moment. You can't create that; it just happens organically.

Oh, Myrt;e, hold the presses!

The DM this early in the a.m. has a huge story up throwing more shade at Meghan than Nottingham Forest.

The diplomat uncle, Mike Markle, who pulled strings to get her into the internship "junior press officer" gig when she flunked the test, has finally surface and is talking loud and viciously at "Diva Meghan".

"Spare a thought for the Duchess of Sussex, (right, with Kate Middleton and left with her family) who has been subjected to yet another highly personal attack from a member of her family. And this time it's by her uncle, former U.S. diplomat Mike Markle (inset), who first helped her on her way to becoming a stateswoman [sic]. He used his influence to secure her a prestigious internship as a junior press officer at the American embassy in Argentina when she was 20 and considering a career in international relations. Meghan has climbed socially and left us behind - that's how I feel,' says Mike, 80, the elder brother of her father, Thomas. 'I think that's what happens when you're 'underclass' and trying to rise above the reality of your situation.' "

Let's see the CB fraus spring indignantly into action and try to portray the former diplomat as a piece of trash like his brother.

Gentlemen, start your engines!

^*Myrtle

The interview with "Woman Magazine" isn't the first time the uncle has appeared - the DM ran an article on his "hurt" at not being invited to the wedding in August 2018, and how he would have been glad to fly to England to walk her down the aisle when his brother couldn't, despite having Parkinson's.

I wonder why the previous article didn't get more play.

But this one is far more pointedly critical than the first one. He asserts that she has a chip on her shoulder because of how her father spoilt her.

That said, whoever put this one together for the DM didn't do a careful edit: it states at the end that after spending Thanksgiving with Meghan's mother, the Sussexes will return to England to spend Christmas with the Queen ayt Sandringham, according to tradition.

Unless the DM knows something we don't, that last leaves the editors with egg on their faces.

I will say this for the millioneth time. London might have gone into grievefest saint Di bollocks, the rest of the country were just thinking what the hell is going on , poor boys and tara was about it.

Meghan ditched her dad when he accepted big bucks for two sit down, filmed interviews with The Sun and The Mail. This was in 2017/2018. Before that, yes she was a daddy's girl; yes she wrote about him. After that, she wasn't. I'm sure if Kate's father had done similar you would all be absolutely fine with her disowning him.

The Klan in their impotent rage, the rage of celibate 70/80 year old women obsessed with royalty and too insecure to make accounts on a board where posters are named, completely ignore that Markle sold stories on Meghan. It counts for nothing.

R226 I don't think the Klan would have me. I'm mixed race and gay. Two big no-nos. But do go on.

She's a lush, r191.

I'm on Prince Philip's side where that fool is concerned.

So dignified...

Such a lady...

Only occasionally satanic..

Like Doria doesn't notify the paps when she donates a couple blankets to firefighters. How'd the paps know she was doing that again? Wasn't it curious that the other people making donations did so with items stored in boxes or garbage bags but Doria had just a couple blankets casually slung over her arm? If people think Pa Markle was the only one working with the paps, they're delusional, willfully ignorant or just plain stupid. And yes, people would have been all over Kate if she ghosted her father - who made her entire education possible - for posing for a few pap photos. But Kate is a better person than Meghan, so it's a non-starter.

I seem to remember reading that after the very public manic Diana grieving a lot of people in the UK were embarrassed by it. It was one of those, "What the hell were we all thinking" moments. For those who were there, what were the feelings regarding the mass hysteria after the fact?

Papa Dearest also sided with Samantha, who regardless what anyone thinks of Meg, was UNHINGED and determined to hurt her in any way possible. I would be wary of him myself if I had a psycho sibling and he kept ties,

I'm not saying Sam Markle seems nice or stable (she seems to be neither) but she's not really said or done anything I wouldn't expect a jealous/bitter unfavoured sibling to say. And Meg seems like just as much of neither nice nor stable perspn as sis Markle, tbh. Whole fam just seems dysfunctional and cunty. Being pretty and rich doesn't erase the shitty parts of your personality.

Sam's own mother and kids don't speak to her. Dear Old Dad seems like the only family member that does. Her hostility is at a level that would frighten me if I were Meg. The other family members are certainly cashing in but none of them seem OBSESSED about it like she does.

Obsessed? I haven't heard from her for months (I think she may have popped up once a couple of weeks ago to comment on a lawsuit she was launching against some internet meanies or sth?). If I was poor as fk, had health problems, lived in the US and my sib who I don't get along with married into royalty I'd probably take the paycheck to do an interview or two. Why not?

She's been quiet recently but really what does she have to say? They've never been close and haven't seen each other in a decade. But I think she did more interviews than the rest of the family combined, not to mention setting up Dad's pap strolls. No one on DL would want her in their family tree. While I think Meg has made many MANY mistakes, staying away from this psycho seems smart.

Yeah, Sam never seemed unhinged. Bitter, more like, and jealous, but also had some grains of truth. Fact is, had Meghan not ghosted her entire family, a chunk of us would feel differently about her. Even the Windsors in their most outlandish satire couldn't imagine her ghosting her father. They had Pa Markle proudly walking his Bean down the aisle like a redneck yokel. And her pleased as punch to be on his arm.

R240 aside from Dear Old Dad, how many were actually ghosted? How many had real relationships with her in say 2010-2016? The Markle clan doesn't seem close in any way. everybody seems to be estranged from everybody. Sam from her mom and kids. Tom Jr from his kids (they dropped his last name). Even DiplomatUncle in his new interview said he's close to his other brother but not Dear Old Dad.

Closeness and frequent interaction doesn't always matter when it comes to family. If I had an uncle who pulled strings to get me an embassy job overseas and I ended up marrying a prince, you better fucking believe the man would be at my wedding. If I had a niece I featured on Instagram and promised her I'd always be there for her, you better believe she'd be at the goddamn wedding. Yeah, she ghosted the niece she built up on social media. That's a cold-hearted bitch move.

The uncle I'll give you was one of her many dumb mistakes. The niece...shrug.

I have a maternal cousin I haven't seen in the flesh since he took me to see Toy Story 2 in theaters. Last time we chatted on social media was at least 6 years ago. I probably won't invite him if I ever get married.

My paternal family I wouldn't know if I passed them on the street. When my father's mother died, they couldn't locate all her kids to inform them. There's no ill will, but no relationship either.

She should have just grinned and born it and had her father, uncle and niece along with her mother at the wedding. Had she done that I think people would have understood cutting out the trashy half siblings. But not having anyone other than Doria there looked abnormally ice cold. Even from an optics perspective, she just should have included a handful of people related to her. I wonder if that's also one of the reasons behind her rumored jealousy of Kate. Kate is tight with her family and Ma and Pa Middleton's whispered separate lives aside, they seem a loving family.

How many of the Markles were at her first wedding?

R244 Kate had more relatives at the Sussex wedding than Meg.

R226 - Meghan ditched her Dad the moment she started dating Prince Harry - that was long before he appeared in the DM. She made sure the two of them never met, long ybefore they were engaged, let alone marrie d. The way she ditched her uncle, ditched her husband, ditched her best friend, has ditched the BRF now that she got the title and famous hubby she wanted - and one day, you pychotic cunt, we'll be here talking about how she ditched Harry when he was no more use to her.

As for the Klan - you might want to check out the quote put up from a sistah from Lipstick Alley about Meghan. Yeah, she's probably a Klan member, too.

Well, her father I believe was at her first wedding.

R244 Optics have never been her forte.

R248 yeah. It's not as the Markles were One Big Happy Family back then. Mom and Dad were there and as far as I know, that's about it. Open to more info. I side eye Meg for many dumb and avoidable mistakes, but some on the DL act like she came from Walton's Mountain or Little Women.

'Meghan doesn’t fit the mold, while Kate was groomed for this.” Except… no. Kate wasn’t actually groomed for jacks–t. She had no idea how to run a household (Carole had to come and manage the staff of Anmer), she spent a “lost decade” doing nothing but wait for William to propose and it took Kate seven years of marriage to feel “comfortable” in the duchess role. And she only felt comfortable in the role when Meghan came around and gave her some (say it for the people in the back) COMPETITION.

On Meghan’s side, I could see how she initially would take pains to come to Kate with the “no competition” angle. But Meghan’s a bright woman, she sees what Kate’s been doing (and not doing) this whole f–king time. Basically, though, I still believe that if everyone left Kate and Meghan in peace, they would relationship would just be “friendly work acquaintances.”

Um initially? R251? Megs been involved with the BRF for 3 years now

Given her glowing descriptions of her father (and not her mother, from what I understand), on social media, it is reasonable to ask why she did not introduce him to Harry when they got engaged.

And Harry should have insisted on meeting him. The fact that he did not insist does not speak well of him or his intelligence. And if he was not smart enough to insist, his family should have insisted.

So what if her father is fat. Get real. Get him in a great suit for the wedding, and proper clothes for the time he was in the UK for the wedding and if he talks too much, get one of those minders that the RF use to keep people on track. (Like the man hovering behind Sparkle at the Remembrance Day event.)

Sparkle's having only a single family member (and NOT the one she glowingly mentioned or the one who paid for her very expensive education) was one of the first red flags for those who people-watch the RF.

Replacing those missing family members with a bunch of celebrities she did not know and who did not know her was another red flag.

When people show you who they are, you should believe them.

The DM now has a piece up insisting that they have heard from their usual "royal sources/insiders" that those talks up at Sandringham between Charles and Philip are about nothing less than the Queen agreeing to make Charles Regent when she turns 95, whilst remaining Sovereign in form if not function. This allegedly involves an open acknowledgement that Charles will be running the day to day monarchy.

This isn't much of a surprise, as it's probably been coming on for several years, ditto William being brought in increasingly on the running of the Duchy of Cornwall, and, contrary to the assertions of a troll, his voice is getting louder within the family as these decisions impact his family. If Charles is formally announced as Regent, the running of the Duchy becomes more difficult. Mum remains Sovereign but Charles runs the day to day monarhcy, then who runs the day to day Duchy of Cornwall? There's only so much time in the day . . .

As no other paper has picked this up, I retain some scepticism about whether it comes from a genuine source, or whether it's the DM making, er, call them "good guesses".

Either way, if it does turn out to be true, it doesn't bode well for the Sussexes. They'll be told either to accept the constraints of their role or get out and make way for that Swedenised monarchy. No matter how he feels about his son, Charles can't miss the destructive parallel between his mother's handling of Andrew, and his own handling of Harry. Both men have exhibited little regard for the institution but intense regard for getting their own way.

If it's damaging to the institution over the long term, Charles won't tolerate it. The handwriting is on the wall that with Charles, and, by the nature of hereditary monarchy, William, ever closer to the next steps up, with attendant increased status and influence, the Sussexes are in danger of being kicked to the curb if they don't play ball and stop their absurd, I Want To Be Free But Don't Stop Paying Me! act.

In addition to the two upcoming glittery receptions, and the Sandringham pap walk, the other interesting big will be the Queen's speech on the Day. I don't see how she can not address what has happened over the last year, amongst Andrew, Harry, and Meghan.

^*interesting bit

R254... it's the second time in six months I've seen the Regency story put out there... I think the first may have been in the Telegraph but not sure. They're just laying the groundwork to make it so.

Yeah, the Sussexes have a year and a half to either shape up or ship out. I'm betting on shipping out: Meghan hasn't been serious about being a Royal ever since she realized that she'd never be able to eclipse Kate in status and influence. If she can't be Queen, she wants no part of it.

My money's on them shipping out too. We're going to hear a lot of crap about nit being able to have their voices heard, not being able to help the causes truly near and dear to their hearts, etc. Or during the next 18 months they may figure out that without the BRF they're simply novelties without anything substantive to offer.

Shaping up would be the best prospect for their future, if they could only see it. Behave properly during this time of crisis, and suddenly the Royal jewel vault might crack open. And oh wait, the Orangerie at Kensington Palace is now available. And we have this darling little country home that would be just perfect for you . . . and of COURSE Archie will be an HRH when Charles ascends. The goodies are still there for the taking, and the Andrew crisis gives them leverage they didn't have before. Play nice, and the Sussexes would get a much-needed second chance.

R258 - I mostly agree. What I don't agree on is that they have 18 months in which to figure it out. Unless she's already in the club again, in which case they'll stick it out for longer so the baby can be born Lord this or Lady that, they have to move faster. She's a year and a bit out from 40, her cachet outside would be polished as much for leaving as for staying on (and continuing to fight negative PR) at least for a little while ("The couple who threw it all away for freedom!! Look how Woke they are!!).

If she isn't pregnant again, yet, they'd be well advised to make the decision to leave now and stick with it. Because once fully in charge, neither Charles nor William are going to put up with their constant whingeing whilst taking perks from the UK taxpayer any longer, and Charles and William, set free from worrying about what the Queen will say, are likely to be a bit more vocal about their intolerance for Harry's and Meghan's approach to royal life.

The message will be, shape up or ship out. Once that message is delivered, I don't see Meghan, particularly, hanging around. She won't be as likely to call Charles' bluff as she was the doddering Queen's. Meghan doesn't care about missing photos: she cares about the limelight, the money, the clothes, and pissing all over Kate and William.

I think the Sussexes have already done themselves in with the "documentary" (Harry and Meghan Incidentally in Africa), the lawsuit, and the last spate of leaked stories about, again, how no one is paying attention to them, curling up under tables, and the Unformed Princess Kate.

Meghan has made her ruthless willingness to smear the BRF whilst continuing to enjoy its perks clear.

They have to go.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Another investiture for William.

William hosts a reception for recepients of the Diana Awards.

Swipe for the life of Queen's Victoria's daughter, Princess Louise. She was the one who married a Scottish gay aristocrat.

It was two years ago today that I put on my oversize stilettos, held on for dear life and strutted my way to the biggest photo op of my life. Oh yeah, my fiance was there as well.

If the Sussexes are going to jump, 2020 is the time. Once Charles is King Regent they'll have less freedom to do what they want, and once William is King, forget it. And by that time, they'll be in their 50s and their outside prospects will be nil. If they think they can make it on their own in America, they may as well go ahead and do it.

The Sussexes never forget a date that is all about THEM.

A photo shopped picture of Kate wearing Eugenie's wedding tiara. I think it looks quite lovely on her.

Sophie Wessex had a busy day.

[QUOTE] If the Sussexes are going to jump, 2020 is the time. Once Charles is King Regent they'll have less freedom to do what they want, and once William is King, forget it. And by that time, they'll be in their 50s and their outside prospects will be nil. If they think they can make it on their own in America, they may as well go ahead and do it.

Harry is too committed to the Invictus Games, his work in Africa and his patronages to consider moving to the US to do nothing. When the Queen dies, he will be the most popular member of the royal family. Charles knows this and will be careful to let Harry know that he is loved and valued.

Technically, Edward's kis are already HRHs, but Edward headed that off by accepting an earldom rather than a dukedom upon his marriage. Lady Louise looks quite shy and these two have been kept out of the limelight. No, Bea and Yuge are the natural replacements, but their psycho parents fixed that for them.

The Greville looks fabulous on Kate; emeralds are her natural fit, with her colouring, not sapphires.

That said, I don't like the earrings with the bandeau-Kokoshnik style tiara. A better fit would be the Cambridge emerald drops, which I think Kate has been leant before by HM.

God Meghan looked awful. The shoes falling off, the white coat off-season, and shorter than the dress, and with her usual Let's Do A Wrap Belt To Pretend I Have A Waist, and last, the now-familiar double clutch-hold on Harry.

This is what Harry will be doing in 2020. Not a chance that he'll decamp to the US permanently.

Kate's earring collection - Part One.

Boring earrings.

But the third photo, the far right, in the second set, that cute brown felt/velvet hat worn to the side . . . I could swear I saw that same hat on Crown Princess Mary of Denmark at some point. Where can it have been? Opening of the Folketing?

No, found the image - very similar but not the same. Mary's had a very large bow on the side. Gorgeous shoes, too.

R275

Kate needs to get with full Royal Mufti and start wearing pearls, which she only wears with that bloody Cambridge Lover's Knot Tiara and the drop earrings. With her height Kate could wear layers. Her earrings are boing unless they're ones the Queen lends her for the Big Events. No one's really given pearls their due since Diana, except the Queen, and with that wattle and her ever diminishing height, it's pointless.

Come on, Kate. Nothing's sexier than three strands of luminous pearls hanging nearly into the cleavage of a demure silk blouse or cashmere sweater. Put a pencil skirt under it and some high pumps, put your hair up in a chignon, and no one will even remember Meghan Markle's name the next day . . .

If you could wear a black g-string under that blue Victorian mess at Ascot this year, you can try this. You come out in a three-strand pearl necklace and the papers will go nuts the next day.

The Queen is actually very well-informed about jewels and jewelry. During a chat regarding one of the Royal crowns, she touched some dangling pearls, and noted that they weren't receiving the proper attention danging at the apex of a crown. What she was trying to say (discreetly, of course) was that it's always been said that pearls are meant to be worn next to a woman's skin, to absorb a bit of moisture, and end up being burnished a bit in the process. The Queen indicated she especially likes the Black Prince's Ruby (which is actually a spinel, I believe).

Here is HM discussing some of the Royal Jewels. HM doesn't agree to interviews, but she did agree to chat about the Royal Jewels. Watch how casually (brusquely) she treats the Crown itself, and you'll learn a life lesson.

I saw that interview.

I loved how we found out that the "Ruby of the Black Prince" was worn into battle. Also, it had been drilled top to bottom so that the wearer could put a feather through the jewel when he wore it.

I think Kate patterned herself quite a lot on Crown Princess Mary. In Kate's case, taking Mary as an example seems natural as they don't differ that much when it comes to their faces and bodies.

I love how TQ plays around with St Edward's Crown, dangling the pearls and that. But remember, she - and she only, as she is the monarch ruling 'by the grace of God' - is allowed to do so.

If fucking Alastair Bruce playfully messed around with this particular crown - it's the coronation crown, God help him, hahahaha.

Yeah, the goodies are most certainty NOT there for the taking. That ship sailed sfter that first disasterous tour. No, they want her long gone. She will not get a settlement nor will she be welcomed around the BRF. They are banned from Christmas ffs. This is the beginning of the end for the Harkles and their "marriage".

R283 - No one banned the Sussexes from Christmas or anything else. Where do you come up with ideas for all this made up shit.

R283-this may be why she's hustling so hard to raise money for the Sussex Foundation. Time will tell how this will all play out.