Meghan Markle found to be using Royal title to lobby U.S. Congress members for pet projects

"And she goes, 'Senator Capito?' I said, 'Yes.' She said, "This is Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex."

LOL! Werk it girl!

[quote]She said, "This is Meghan, the Duchess of Nepotism, third in line to suck the air out of any scene.”

The Cuntess of Monteshitto has spoken and you bitches would better listen. But don't forget to ask if I'm okay though.

My, she certainly thinks highly of herself and her opinions. "Bow to my will, peasants! BOW!!!!"

As she ages, she'll be a campTastic nobody, but she's going to be fun to watch. A younger version of that D-list royal DL is always talking about. Duches Kent or something? Meghan'll be like that, only more fun. And American-based.

I don't follow the stories about this woman. Is she allowed to use her title? I would think she is. Just not the Her Royal Highness?

If I were her I would announce myself, "This is Meghan, not the fat one who's the daughter of John McCain, but the darker one who is the daughter of a total nobody."

R5 - I think you are referring to Princess Michael of Kent. The Duchess of Kent in a not a D-List and she is is very respected in the UK and by the British Royal Family as a whole.

I thought that they were not allowed to use their titles to influence politics?

This is Megan, Duchess if Sussex. You might remember me from Deal or No Deal.

A grifter learns to use the tools at hand.

She is delusional and full of herself.

She's like a pesky gnat that won't go away no matter how much you try to swat it away.

R8 - The British Royal Family has undertaken the initiative to influence British and world politics for years!

R8 - The British Royal Family is by agreement (since Queen Victoria) not involved in party politics but they are involved in politics in general up to their necks.

But she’s not part of the BRF. I thought they made that clear ad nauseam.

Why is a foreign citizen lobbying for policy or legislation regarding anything?

Question: Since she married Harry and he technically does not have a last name (although uses Windsor), does she have a last name anymore?

Question for royal watchers: is she Meghan, THE Duchess of Sussex, or merely Meghan, Duchess of Sussex. I seem to recall that with Diana, keeping the "THE" in her title was some sort of big deal.

For all you mooks, that is her name. On Archie's birth certificate, her occupation is listed as 'princess'.

Markle is her maiden name.

R14 - I was trying to explain why some people believe that Meghan cannot engage in politics. Meghan is a US citizen and US citizens have a constitutional right to petition the US government(s). Meghan DOES NOT have a right to petition the UK and Commonwealth governments.

You DO NOT lose your US constitutional rights if you marry a foreigner or a foreign royal.

[quote]For all you mooks, that is her name. On Archie's birth certificate, her occupation is listed as 'princess'.

Meghan has never been, is not, and will never be a "Princess."

[quote]Question: Since she married Harry and he technically does not have a last name (although uses Windsor), does she have a last name anymore?

Are you typing from the 19th Century, luv?

"Why is a foreign citizen lobbying for policy or legislation regarding anything?"

R14 - Meghan is not a foreign citizen. Meghan is a US citizen. Why do you think that Meghan is foreign citizen?

R18 - Upon marriage, Meghan became "the Princess Henry".

In R20, R14 should be R15. Sorry for the typo.

Her desperate, grasping antics are becoming comical; I wonder what old Haz is up to these days? Can you imagine the crockery that gets thrown at the walls every time Kate (yes, she's not perfect either) shows up at some event, glammed to the nines? I hope one of their poor, hapless "staff" writes a tell all at some point.

R14 - Both Harry and Meghan are members of the British Royal Family.

Meghan & Harry are no longer Senior Working Royals representing QEII.

[quote]Why do you think that Meghan is foreign citizen?

Megs is using a FOREIGN title, believing she will gain advantage. In reality, the ONLY thing she will gain is ridicule.

She is so ridiculously hilarious at this point I hope the BRF just lets her keep going.

She's still HRH The Duchess of Sussex. However, for her commercial ventures, she is Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, not Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex.

No, she was never "The Princess Henry" because "The Prince/Princess style only comes with being the child of the monarch, at least in the United Kingdom. She was and still is Princess Henry, though.

I guess we'll all just ignore the fact that Senators have each others phone calls blocked. But it's much more important to bitch about Meghan.

wow gave her the authority to interfere in politics? using that title? who the fuck does she think she is?

We don't give a shit about the cunts from England, that's why we left ! dumb cunt!

R16, a fraud by any other name is still a fraud.

another reason to dislike this useless, shameless whore.

Yes, she has the title Princess Henry, not Princess Meghan or The Princess Meghan.

And she is still a Royal Highness but isn't supposed to use that.

[quote]We don't give a shit about the cunts from England, that's why we left ! dumb cunt!

Speaking of dumb cunts . . . you.

Meghan isn't from England.

I agree with R5, I enjoy the drama she creates with her capers, mostly because she and Harry are like giraffes learning to walk with their attempts to influence US policy.

Their strategy is in an ineffective gray zone between the celebrity very quiet light touch approach and a very public full-court press (like Kim K lobbying Trump). They have enough money and influence to be helpful on certain things, but they don’t seem to have very good advisors. For example, someone like Senator Capito would have been happy to take a scheduled phone call or meeting with Meghan (Susan Collins seems a bit more grouchy…), but Meghan springing the call on her might feel like an ego play to Shelley, which would put her off.

These two need to get a lil smarter.

Who cares? If she's trying for paid paternity leave, good for her.

Why is someone who doesn't work, lives in a $10 million home, wears thousands of dollars worth of jewelry ,has nannies to take care of the kids and a husband who does nothing but cower in her presence, bothering US Congress about paternity?

What a buttinski.

R33, i'm talking about cunts using their royal titles. you the dumb cunt! We don't give a shit about that here!

she wants her husband to get paid for staying home and doing nothing while she tries to squeeze out another egg from her dusty ovary.

It doesn’t bother me that she’s trying to use a royal title for influence in the US, it only bothers me if elected officials are actually influenced by it. I don’t care if someone is calling up Susan Collins saying “I’m the Queen of Soul” or “the lost descendant of Anastasia” or some other nonsense.

Megs the narcissist wants attention. Not paternity leave, not mentoring, not authoring, not food delivery to shut-ins, not empowering women, and certainly not public service. She wants to be the only star in the galaxy, rather than just another nameless turd in the cesspool.

Meghan, “The Duchess of Sussex” slings that title anywhere and everywhere. Did you happen to see her YouTube vid reading her word salad book to children? She begins by introducing herself [bold] using the duchess title to toddler children.

She is beyond parody now.

Love Meghan, hate her haters

Anglophile Klan Grannies must die!

She may be using the title so they'll give her more serious attention. I mean, if she called and said "this is Meghan Markle" these people might think say "who?" She's hardly a household name.

R43 If someone called you and said "Hi, this is Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge", your response would either be "Huh"? "What"? Or you'd hang up.

Maybe she's using the title as an intro so people don't say "who the fuck is Meghan Markle?" She's not exactly a household name.

R7 "The Duchess of Kent in a not a D-List and she is is very respected in the UK and by the British Royal Family as a whole."

Yes, isn't she the one Spitting Image always portrayed as a black-booted Nazi and who wore that Blackamoor brooch to an event with Meghan? That respected member of the royal family?

You know you’ve become a laughing stock when Susan Collins, of all people, can get a laugh at your expense.

Of course, US citizens don’t lose their right to express an opinion by virtue of holding titles, but British royals should lose the right to their titles as soon as they publicly express opinions on pending legislation.

You may think it’s okay because she is lobbying on behalf of an issue you favour, but wait until she lobbies against free speech or something similar. And don’t be so happy she is on your side. Republicans have already used her advocacy to paint democratic initiatives as elitist and out of touch. She taints everything she handles.

Fortunately, she goes about her unethical behaviour in such a grotesque and ineffectual way that it probably doesn’t do as much harm to the neutrality of the British royal family as it otherwise would.

I'm going to start calling people, and using a cockney accent, announce myself by saying, "'Ello, luv! This is the bloody Dutchess of bleedin' Sussex!"

R39 the problem is they aren't influenced by it. If anything it gives them an easy excuse to be dismissive, which is apparently what's happening based on the quotes that have been reported. Apparently Harry and Meghan think they have the kind of star power that make US Senators grateful to even be associated with them, which is straight up fucking delusional.

[quote] [R43] If someone called you and said "Hi, this is Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge", your response would either be "Huh"? "What"? Or you'd hang up.

Oh, I should never dream of cold-calling a senator, or really anyone.

Poor sad old Meghan!

Yes, R47, she goes about her unethical behavior in a grotesque way, but I agree with R49:

[quote] the problem is they aren't influenced by it. If anything it gives them an easy excuse to be dismissive, which is apparently what's happening based on the quotes that have been reported. Apparently Harry and Meghan think they have the kind of star power that make US Senators grateful to even be associated with them, which is straight up fucking delusional.

God forbid Meghan Markles the Dems. The Dems are already shooting them selves in the foot. Adding Markle to the mix is a disaster. And what was Gillibrand thinking giving out Senators’ Private Numbers to public citizens? It is infuriating.

Stupid is as stupid duchass does

I just think it's funny that they think a title from a country that the US rebelled against, and won its freedom from, would mean anything to an American politician.

If I were a senator whose number was given out, I would tell Gillibrand that the next time she gives my number out to the public that I'm going to start handing her number out on index cards the next time I'm in an airport.

[quote]And what was Gillibrand thinking giving out Senators’ Private Numbers to public citizens?

R51 You missed the qualifier "Apparently" at the beginning of the sentence. No doubt the same spin source as Megs "having a casual lunch of chicken tacos with Michelle Obama".

Is this too complicated? We don't have royalty in the U.S. or a titled aristocracy. It goes to the core of what America is.

The issue isn't whether she can technically use the title. The issue is whether it's right, particularly for someone who seems convinced her views somehow matter more than other Americans'.

Even if paid family leave passes, does Meghan realistically think she will be able to claim having any part of its passage?

[quote] Moore Capito says she answered and the caller then ID'd herself ... "And she goes, 'Senator Capito?' I said, 'Yes.' She said, "This is Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex."

Hello, Meghan. This is Mary... Queen of Scots.

[quote] If I were a senator whose number was given out, I would tell Gillibrand that the next time she gives my number out to the public that I'm going to start handing her number out on index cards the next time I'm in an airport.

Senators don't mind wealthy people (ie possible donors) calling them.

I have a wealthy relative that has the cell numbers of a few politicians (including a former president) because *they* called *him* out of the blue (to ask him to attend or host high-ticket fundraisers. (They got his cell number from a different wealthy person).

This isn't strange.

I don’t think Republican senators have much expectation of donations from Meghan.

Of course, the most anybody gets from her is something boxes of vegetables or cups of coffee.

Gillibrand admits it.

“ Gillibrand said on Wednesday that she gave senators' numbers to Markle, and said it was just the start.

'I talked to each of the women senators and let them know that she's going to reach out, because she only completed two of the calls,' Gillibrand said.

'She's going to call some others, so I let them know in advance.'

Gillibrand added: 'She wants to be part of a working group to work on paid leave long term and she's going to be.

'Whether this comes to fruition now or later, she'll be part of a group of women that hopefully will work on paid leave together.' ”

R58, like Meghan would donate to Susan Collins. 😂😂😂

Meghan and Harry are clout chasers.

William and the others "took" climate change away from the Sussexes, so they had to find a new cause du jour.

Gillibrand is so basic. The term could have been invented for her.

"Princess Pushy" as Princess Michael of Kent is called within the royal family, is not popular. She's not liked among the family members and is often made fun of, even by the Queen. The British public don't like her either. She's down there in popularity with Andrew. Her one saving grace is that she's active in saving "big cats" and I like big cats.

Harry's wife is Princess Henry of Wales. She is also Mrs. Henry Mountbatten-Windsor.

She apparently has political ambitions. It is in the Constitution that no foreign title holder may hold American political office. It takes an act of congress to approve an exception which they have never given.

[post redacted because independent.co.uk thinks that links to their ridiculous rag are a bad thing. Somebody might want to tell them how the internet works. Or not. We don't really care. They do suck though. Our advice is that you should not click on the link and whatever you do, don't read their truly terrible articles.]

Addendum R66

[quote]the most anybody gets from her is something boxes of vegetables or cups of coffee.

AND empowering bananas!

[quote] Meghan and Harry are clout chasers.

[quote] I don’t think Republican senators have much expectation of donations from Meghan.

Really smart fundraisers--and they can be in politics or in non-profit development--LOVE stupid, rich people. People who specialize in this kind of work will take a crack any day at trying to get a stupid, rich person (or a smart rich person, though those are harder) to get involved with their politician/cause/organization.

[quote] Of course, the most anybody gets from her is something boxes of vegetables or cups of coffee.

Calligraphied banana-grams!

As Markle is an established unethical, grifting, publicity-whore, the fact that politicians such as Gillibrand and Hillary Clinton cozy up to her is troubling and deeply unsettling.

My sister went to school with Markle (and I have written about this before), and Rachel is a devious, manipulative creature.

Markle is to be avoided at all costs as her staff, family and the BRF have discovered. Most individuals with any sense of perception can see this a mile away.

What in the hell are Gillibrand, Clinton and the Democrats thinking?

[quote] What in the hell are Gillibrand, Clinton and the Democrats thinking?

Here is a person who might give us money.

[quote]I just think it's funny that they think a title from a country that the US rebelled against, and won its freedom from, would mean anything to an American politician.

You're so silly. Celebrity is currency in this country. And Meghan is famous.

Why else does pee-whore Kim Kartrashian get to speak to politicians?

But thanks for the shockingly original history lesson, hun.

Meghan is a climber and a credit grabber and merits eye rolls, not outrage.

I think “Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor” would be so much more subtle.

[quote]As Markle is an established unethical, grifting, publicity-whore, the fact that politicians such as Gillibrand and Hillary Clinton cozy up to her is troubling and deeply unsettling.

Like spiders in a jar, all crawling over each other to get to the top.

They're thinking what any competent politician thinks, "How can this person be utilized to further cause X, Y or Z?"

Hillary Clinton is a great American with decades of service to this country, Gillibrand is a trashy cunt who votes correctly most of the time.

The Meghanhater cult loves rightwing American Congress people and quotes them avidly. Quelle surprise!

[quote] Senators don't mind wealthy people (ie possible donors) calling them

I didn’t think about this angle. Good call.

[quote]You're so silly. Celebrity is currency in this country. And Meghan is famous.

Actually you're the silly one. US politics is tribal. Very tribal, in fact. Ain't no way a republican would be seen with a progressive celebrity.

R76 Hard-working and a thousand times better than Trump, yes, but still quite a dismal politician.

[quote] Gillibrand is a trashy cunt who votes correctly most of the time

She has actually done really meaningful work in a narrow but significant issue - sex assault in the military. I know she hasn’t done a lot beyond that, but to me that would justify voting for her again.

Also, I met her once and she curses like a sailor. Which I find interesting.

R71, given that Markle is a notorious skinflint and limits her giving to essentially TWO boxes of veggies, a few cups of coffee and a handful of (written-on) bananas, the idea that she has any $ to give to anyone (other than herself) is ludicrous.

So, not buying the fact that Clinton and Gillibrand think Markle is rolling in the dough. Most of us recognize that what Markle peddles in many, many respects is a façade.

So why the stupidity on the part of the these politicians. Hmmm....perhaps therein LIES the answer?

I do wish that she hadn’t done that. This is bad for her and Harry. You don’t want the day to day responsibilities of being a working BRF member and I applaud you and Harry for making that decision for you and your family’s serenity. But using your title, that is from a foreign country, as a way to lobby in DC? It looks bad. And I don’t hate MM and Harry at all. But this looks mercenary and self-serving.

She should try “Princess Henry of Wales.” One gets the most peculiar looks.

Oh, and there ain't no way a politician would share donor info willingly. Your fellow politician may one day be the competition and the race for donor dollars is intense. Those with the most money usually (not always) win.

The "Right wing hates Harry's wife" and the "Left wing loves Harry's wife" claim is stupid.

I'm as liberal as they come and I'm a Meghan hater. Didn't start out like that, she got it the old fashioned way, she earned it.

She is a classless, disrespectful, opportunistic, sleazy grifter. She's a disgrace as a representative of the United States in a foreign country. She makes us all look like ill-mannered, rude, money-grubbing, staff-abusing, ugly Americans.

[quote]I know she hasn’t done a lot beyond that, but to me that would justify voting for her again.

R81 Oh Gillibrand has done A LOT beyond that. Like leading the scapegoating of the Jew Franken.

R46 you are confusing the Duchess of Kent, who is the wife of the Duke of Kent, with her sister in law Princess Michael who is the wife of the Duke’s younger brother, Prince Michael. The Kents are first cousins on the Queen. The previous D of K was the bisexual younger brother of King George VI.

That stupid, greasy, smug face is begging to be slapped.

R27 - Then how do you explain Princess Michael of Kent? Meghan is "The Princess Henry" just like Sarah Ferguson was "The Princess Andrew" before her divorce from Prince Andrew. A British woman adopts (or may adopt) her husband's style and title upon marriage.

[quote]Of course, the most anybody gets from her is something boxes of vegetables or cups of coffee.

And copies of that book nobody wants to buy.

R93. Yes, I too was shocked by the startling departure from the serene, almost invisible existence they had been pursuing and their sudden embrace of titles that had previously been anathema to them. Her devotion to public service must have blinded her to her how her lbehaviour would be perceived.

This is the suitcase girl who used to lick assholes clean?

I am a Democrat and 1000% support paid leave, however, didn't we fight a war so we didn't have to bow down to British Royalty? At first I was on Harry and Meghan's bandwagon but it's very clearly to me know they very much want to be seen as the royals they claim to hate. I'm sorry but you can't hate the royals but love Meghan and Harry ... sorry Meghan the Duchess of Sussex...because they are very much part of that ridiculous system of monarchy so long as they cling to their titles.

Apparently Gillibrand is hot water with some of her colleagues (not just Republicans). Private numbers are not supposed to be given out to third parties for security reasons.

Well this is embarrassing.

[quote]US politics is tribal. Very tribal, in fact. Ain't no way a republican would be seen with a progressive celebrity.

Nobody is talking about being SEEN with the bitch. This is just about why her calls get through.

[quote]Apparently Gillibrand is hot water with some of her colleagues (not just Republicans). Private numbers are not supposed to be given out to third parties for security reasons.

Yeah, I love the posters upthread insisting that politicians share high dollar donor info and that they trade in celebrity. That's some gold medal contortion to justify what Gillibrand did.

The child of the monarch is referred to with the article The, as in "The Prince Andrew." Harry is not the child of a monarch, so he would be referred to as Prince Harry of Wales (with no article "the"), that is, until he was given the title Duke of Sussex.

[quote]Nobody is talking about being SEEN with the bitch. This is just about why her calls get through.

Yes, I'm sure that Democrats are lining up to take calls from James Woods and Scott Baio. I'm sure that AOC is like, "Cheryl, NEVER put Kevin Sorbo on hold. You let me know when Herc comes a callin'"

R98 I'm sure some politicians do give out their private numbers to donors and such BUT it appears Gillibrand gave Meghan The Duchess of Sussex private numbers without the knowledge of Senators. After the insurrection, that are fears that if numbers get out, politicians could be tracked via GPS by people wishing to do them harm.

It’s Prince HENRY of Wales if we’re getting formal.

I vow never to quitgrasping, grifting, lying.

R28, senators don’t block each other. Some when calling don’t have caller ID. Susan Collins assumed MM’s call was from a senator without caller ID.

R46, you’re confused. You are thinking of Princess Michael of Kent.

I hear she calls QEII and asks: "Do you have Prince Albert in a can?"

I hear she's had Middle Eastern princes in her can.

What does MM have in her can?

[quote]Gillibrand is so basic. The term could have been invented for her.

I was kind of thinking that too; I expect politicians to be craven, but she's just next level

I hope some legislator with a sense of humor gives her Lady G's cellphone number; his crinoline will be all in a twist talking to a real DUCH-ASS!

I see Sunshine Sachs and Markle’s PR has swooped in to grey out this thread in only a few hours.

Invariably, when the “grotesque, unethical” antics of Meghan Markle are brought up for discussion on The Datalounge, the threads are greyed.

The question remains: where is the $$$$$ coming from to support Markle, her grifting, jumping on bandwagons, hiring personnel for the obtuse and shady Archewell, and costly Sunshine Sachs “Klan Granny” Trolls?

Meghan was more appropriate for "DEAL OR NO DEAL".

Yes though, she needs to give Miss Lindsey a ring. There is much they could converse about.

Judas and Jezebel are just throwing everything against the wall like spaghetti to see what sticks.

She will be coming out with her own brand of tequila next.

While I believe she has political ambitions, I also feel like she is just tempting the Queen to strip her and Harry of their titles so she has another victim card to play.

Judas and Jezebel? WTF? What century is this?

Anyway, Senators aren't taking calls from random celebrities on their personal phones in the hopes they might in theory become a big donor. That kind of shit is done with staff so the Senator is one step removed when the arrangements are made, and you only get the personal access once the donation is certain. She only had those numbers because Gillibrand gave them to her. Too bad Gillibrand didn't think to advise the dumbass on how to introduce herself.

What do you expect from a leo?

[quote] Judas and Jezebel? WTF? What century is this?

Indeed. They are taking us back to the Dark Ages. Their actions are incredibly regressive.

None of the credible newspapers are covering this, as far as I can tell. (The Maul is but they're just trolling her for fun and clicks and comments.)

Still, she's plainly breaking the conventions and interfering in elected politics by using the title. But it would take an act of Parliament to remove them unless Harry was asked to surrender them by the Queen. Just doing that would render the prestige of the titles next to nothing. He'd be squatting at that point. She actually has no titles. She shares her husband's rank.

^ MSN and the Boston paper have picked this up with quotes from Susan Collins.

It’s beginning to get more traction.

Rachel is a dolt, but thirsty as hell. It’s been postulated by some that following Megxit and the Great Hollywood Shun, she would begin meddling in politics.

It may sound absolutely ridiculous, but after The Trump Era - and all the destruction it wrought - I now take narcissistic villains seriously.

R117 After the Trump era, political parties so keep their distance from TV stars with political ambitions.

It's getting a fair amount of coverage here in the UK and a growing questioning if they should be allowed to retain any titles. A quick poll taken on GMB showed people don't think she should be allowed to lobby while using her title.

It’s a good cause but cold-calling politicians is really odd. It reminds me in a roundabout way of a British cartoon in the early 90s that said, “In the event of hospitalization, I do NOT wish to be visited by the Princess of Wales.” Supposedly The Queen Mother had it on her desk.

Do-gooding is all very well, but it’s easy to become a joke.

Markle’s brother thinks she could run for Pres.

Maybe she's trying to behave so badly they do take the titles... then they can go on another victim spree and justify what's going to be in his book (which like everything else they touch will turn to shit.)

She's either crafty and ruthless or stupid and nuts but there doesn't seem to be anything in the middle any more. She knew this was thin ice.

I think they should take the Dukedom away. When she does stuff like this in the future, it will sound even more ridiculous, and out of touch calling herself a Princess. "Hello, this is Princess Meghan! I want to speak to you about your car's warranty"

Her deranged stans are photoshopping tiaras on Smegs.

R124 Yup some are calling her "The Queen of America" ............. do they know what America is actually all about?!

The New York Post quote is great:

"Maybe Meghan Markle can call Senators all she wants, but Meghan, Duchess of Sussex cannot."

Remember this moment? I wonder if they regret it?

How many days has it been since this cunt wasn't in the headlines in some way?

More to the point, how many days she she got a headline that didn't make her look like an ass?

Given the Insurrection on 6 January 2021, how wise is it for Gillibrand to be handing out personal details (aka phone numbers) of Senators to public citizens?

Could not these details be useful to those that wish to track the Senators and have more nefarious ends in mind?

R123, LOL, wtf is this crap?

Meghanlomania will NEVER get to wear the Cambridge Lovers Knot tiara.

Tbf, she might have got to wear it once in a while in a couple of years if she had been behaving well in the meantime. But that ship has sailed.

Her fangirls are truly deluded. Deluded and unhinged just like their heroine.

I don't think she ever got to wear a tiara, except for her wedding day.

I bet that still gets up her nose.

I'd be so pissed off with a coworker or friend giving out my cellphone number without my permission.

I'm wondering if Gillibrand will get in trouble for this with the Senate.

So....I hate the monarchy....so I lived for the Oprah interview but yeah, it's obvious now that these two are just a joke. I'm starting to doubt the claims of the British media being super racist and rather, every one just had enough of their self-importance. Like every major event in the last few weeks they've had to put their two cents out there, like we're all just dying to know what they think. I realllllly hope the democrats are not stupid enough to seriously want Meghan to run for office.

I think Meghan is about as likely to secure a nomination for major office as Connor Roy is on "Succession."

“So…so…but yeah…super racist…Like…like…reallllly…seriously”.

This is satire, right, R135?

I didn't think this was a true story. I thought this was a gossipy smear against Meaghan.

Wowsers. She is not ready for prime time.

The Politico article that details Senators Collins and Capuitos’ interactions with Markle cold-calling them and using “I’m Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex”, makes her sound [bold] unhinged.

[quote]Where’s the London Tower when you need it?

It's the Tower of London, and it's right where it's always been!

Guuurl!

Taking bets now on when the title is pulled! I say Feb 2022.

[quote]It's the Tower of London, and it's right where it's always been!

However London Bridge packed up and moved to Lake Havasu City, Arizona

Wow. Megsie must be a better actress than I thought if she was able to convince Gillibrand that she understands what the every day woman goes through trying to balance work and child care. Also, Gillibrand is a moron.

I don't really care about Meghan or all the drama around her BUT I have a hard time buying her claims of racism within the monarchy. If I had married into the family only to discover that wanted to withhold my son's birthright as a Prince because they were worried about the color of his skin, I would fucking left and set fire to the whole thing. And yet she keeps going around reminding everyone she is the Duchess of Sussex a title that belongs to an alleged institution of racism..............

So tea allegedly leaking out from some GOP's senator's staff, the believe this conversations were recorded by Meghan as part of her Netflix documentary.

Did nobody explain to her that as soon as Liz kicks the bucket her son will be the grandson of a King and an HRH, Prince Archie of Sussex?

R146 The issue was that they were told that Archie (and Lilly) would not get HRH status when Charles becomes King due to Charles' plans to scale down the monarchy. Charles is likely going to issue new Letters Patent after his accession which would retroactively make Harry's children non-eligible for HRH status. Harry has know this since at least 2012 (but probably earlier) and it only became an issue after he married Meghan.

R144, that's not even what happened. It's just what their various innuendoes add up to for some people. Those children, as GREAT-grandchildren of the monarch, are not entitle to HRHs.

R148 Meghan STRONGLY implied that beyond the rules about who gets HRH, the color of Archie's skin was a worry that was a factor why her children wouldn't get titles. That's what caused the WAHHHHTTTT reaction from Oprah which seemed scripted in my opinion.

[quote]That's what caused the WAHHHHTTTT reaction from Oprah which seemed scripted in my opinion.

100% scripted, to be sure.

Putting a lot of things aside, does anyone with the IQ of a grapefruit think MM has any serious, detailed knowledge of the issue, its intracracies, realities, etc.? But she'll show up, sprinkle her royal magic faerie dust on the proceedings and all will be right with the world?

There is a growing backlash in the UK even among media outlets that are more sympathetic to the Sussexes.

A former C-list actress, marries the Queen's grandson, decides the UK press has treated her badly, persuades her husband to move the family back to the US west coast, now wants to lobby US Senators about public policy? Right. Does she realize how ridiculous she is, and how ridiculous she has made her husband? After years of the royal family's team successfully curating Harry's PR, she has now exposed the truth about him -- that he's shallow, emotionally immature, and peevish. Collectively, they come off as pretentious, hypocritical, and presumptuous. The constant emphasis on happy families (see "The Bench"), juxtaposed with them both having rejected their families, reveals their obliviousness to a truth that is obvious to nearly everyone.

My fellow Americans,

You do not cold call Senators. Unless you are the President. She is batshit delusional grandiose insane. You set up an agreed upon time to call with staff. And you absolutely do not let the press know you did so.

Be embarrassed. The Royal Family is lucky to be rid of her- she is truly out of control.

R153 she doesn't give a fuck about Harry.

To her, Harry was nothing but a tool.

Harry is not a tool. A tool is useful and can be used to fix things. Harry is a tennis racket with no strings.

Oh, Haz is a tool. Do you think anyone would know or care about the D-list actress without her being attached to Duke Dim? The attention she has is all because of him.

R156 LOL!!

R154 brings up an excellent point. Elected officials do things through official channels, to cover their asses.

When I visited my local assembly person, we had to check in with an assistant. The meeting took place in his office with the door open, and was visible to everyone because one whole wall of the office is a window. My husband has worked with this guy for years, and only accidentally learned his child’s name - it’s private information . Everything goes through his assistant, his time is officially blocked out on a calendar, he doesn’t meet alone with anyone.

There’s a reason for all that, and he’s not even a state senator. Gillibrand and Markle circumvented all the safety/propriety measures and checks and balances.

Gillibrand and Markle = The Thirsty Sisters

This was reported in The Hill on 9/3021:

Two leadership PACs controlled by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) spent a combined $1.9 million, but just one-quarter went to political activities, according to the report. The PAC spent $7,800 at a five-star New York City hotel and $2,100 at the five-star Viceroy L’Ermitage Beverly Hills, which calls itself “the epitome of Hollywood glamour.”

For the troll that calls everyone Boris, Republicans also used PACS for luxury living, the worst:

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) spent 18 percent of his PAC’s $2.2 million on political activities, spending $12,000 on Houston Astros games and $5,000 at the Cloister at Sea Island, Georgia’s top-rated luxury hotel, the report found.

The point being associating with Meghan Markle is right up Gillibrand's alley. Al Franken should say something about that.

Al Franken groped eight different women, including a woman on active duty in the military. Hate Senator Gillibrand for befriending Meghan Markle if you want, but she did the right thing about Al Franken and the Dems are well shot of him. I don’t get the undying loyalty to him from some Dems.

Meghan, The Duchess of Sizzler.

No one even remembers that the brittle white-haired Gillibrand ran for President. Bitch looks like the personification of osteoporosis.

Speaking of osteoporosis personified, why hasn’t Meghan glommed onto Mika Brzezinski? Mika is right up her snooty alley, being so outspoken about women’s issues. Mika is also very good at using men to get ahead. And she has a show!

Mika isn't a big enough name for our illustrious Megsie. She's a duchess, in case you didn't know. Besides, once you've gotten the likes of OPRAH to aid you in your grift, anything else is a step down.

I've noticed this problem with gold diggers- they think they've married up and gained entry into a higher class and new world of opportunities. They've won, the sky is the limit, their ambition knows no bounds!

The smart ones realize that, actually, the reason that high class, rich bachelor married you is because he failed to secure a good woman from his class, he's an addict, an abuser, a loser, crazy... and you've brought him down, he didn't elevate you. Some, like Meaghan and Hilaria, dig deeper into delusion, try to brazen out some kind of celebrity status. Others know their place and enjoy the perks.

This is being reported on one of the other threads but The Times is reporting Buckingham Palace allegedly officially "warned" (at the behest of the Office of Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs) the Sussexes that they cannot lobby US Politicians while using the titles. That it is violation of the terms of the agreement they signed with the Palace and that the Prime Minister's Office is increasingly 'concerned' that this could damage US/UK relations. Aka the Prime Minister's Office is ready is to remove their peerage if they don't voluntarily give it up.

I understand how Meg’s stunt violated the terms of the agreement, but how would it jeopardize relations between the US and England?

Everyone knows she doesn’t represent the BRF. Everyone knows that she pulled a self-aggrandizing stunt. I don’t think anyone is mad at England for what this cunt did. Personally, I’m only mad at Gillibrand for enabling it, I’m not even mad at Meghan because she’s doing what she does. It’s like being mad at Kim Kardashian for dressing like a hooker.

And why would the British people be mad at the US?

Well, she's married to a royal who let slip his opinion that the 1st Amendment is "bonkers," politicizing himself. Whether he's a working royal or not, it isn't permitted. How do we know she doesn't have a similar opinion and curtailing press freedom is not part of her agenda. As a couple, their litigiousness certainly implies as much.

What if an American citizen is married to an wealthy or influential British citizen and starts lobbying MPs on their private lines about whatever?

The appearance of meddling in another county's business isn't diplomatic just like using a foreign title to gain access to the highest echelons of power here isn't diplomatic.

I'm sorry. I still don't understand the white dress from the NYC trip. There is no reason for impersonating a box of corn flakes.

R170, good points.

What did Meghan get out of it?

Or a refrigerator

R170, an American woman married to a British aristocrat is different from an American woman married to a British prince. Harry and Meghan continue to be members of the royal family, even if they are not working members. Her engagement with American senators is problematic for the British Government and, therefore, for the royal family. I think Harry and Meghan have a stark choice: stay out of politics as members of a royal family must, or give up their titles and become known as Mr. and Mrs. Mountbatten-Windsor.

I forgot to add at r170 that, of course, the British government and companies owned by private British citizens try to influence U.S. lawmaking when legislation that affects their interests is ongoing. The UK government and people like Richard Branson and Virgin hire lobbyists to advocate with U.S. reps and senators. Lobbyists have to abide by a number of laws and both they and people in Congress have to make disclosures, financial, etc. I'm assuming there's a parallel structure for foreign governments and Bezos types to advocate MPs.

Another thing is that, regardless of how moral an ethical paid Family Leave is, it may not be in the British government's or British companies' interests. I assume Johnson and the Tories oppose it if there isn't any in the UK and want to curtail it if there is. Also I'm sure British corporations, like American Incs oppose the whole thing because they'll be footing. And these two using their British ducal titles to influence what the British govt may not agree with. They politicized their titles which is completely against BP's agreement.

Of all the things they’ve tried their hand at, this is the one that’s gotten the most attention. This makes me think that she’s going to keep poking at politics. She’s struck a vein.

She’s only struck a vein because she’s using her title inappropriately.

R176. But like everything they do, it’s a one-shot. Given the unfavourable attention this modest foray into politics has received, I don’t think she will be receiving many similar invitations. She will have to achieve political relevance on her own, which she lacks the discipline, intelligence, and personal appeal to di. Her political career will last as long as her career as a working royal, her literary career, her revived acting career, her role in advising us on how to face up to the Covid epidemic, and her media content creation career. She is nearing the end of the line. The remaining options will be increasingly degrading and unethical.

This is a really insightful and balanced analysis of the Sussexes issues going forward by Camilla Tominey. Increasingly, they are going to have fight for relevancy in a way they would never have had to by virtue of being royals. She says, that royals don't have to brand themselves on a personal level the same way celebrities do and as such, when they turn up at events like COP26, they wield far more influence than "politicians and celebrities of the moment." And I agree with here, that the Sussexes likely had far more potential as international "do-gooders" if they had remained within in the royals. Even if they were constitutionally less important than W&C, they appealed to younger people and would have been part of the monarchy's center stage for at least 20 years until Prince George is of age. It's doubtful, They are now in Hollywood and not only have to compete against the monarchy, but against celebrities and Hollywood is far more unforgiving and doesn't have the power of the British state behind it. Also, there is growing feel that the damage of that Oprah interview has almost totally subsided in the UK. Attention is turning back to the Queen and a sense that perhaps public opinion for Charles is on the up again after his success taking center stage at COP26. This is the first time Charles has been the host of a major international gathering, and the feedback from world leaders has been largely positive....even in 2021, there is just something about royalty that celebs can't emulate.

Interesting R179; even though they're fun to bash, I really don't wish anything bad for them - in fact, you wish they'd just get on with the private life they said they wanted so badly. But just like we still speculate when things turned south for Diana, I think years from now when they're both in pieces (probably mostly Harry), we'll look back on this time as When It All Went Wrong for them.

r7 The Duchess of Kent is an extremely lovely lady who managed to walk the tightrope of being respected by the whole royal family and showing support ,loyalty and friendship to the Queen,Princess Diana and Fergie. not an easy thing to pull off.

The only flaw I see with that, r179, is in the assumption HaM wanted to be do gooders. I don’t believe that. I think everything they are doing now is intended to lead back to money.

Allegedly the Sussexes offered to send the organizers of COP26 a pre-recorded message which was met by a "thanks but no thanks."

^If true, this is just hilarious.

These twits sending such a message to an event of worldwide importance is just ANOTHER sign of their delusions of grandeur. Srsly, who do they think they are?

Perhaps the most hilarious thing about them trying to shoehorn themselves into COP26 is that they might've attended with William and Catherine as "the fabulous four" if they were still working royals. Meghan could've been able to make sheep's eyes at Leo diCaprio like Jeff Bezos' plastic bird (Lauren Whatever) did, LOL. Alas, she let that opportunity slip -- just like she let A LOT of opportunities slip in order to "be free".

But hey, it's TOTALLY obvious that MEGHAN, THE DUCHESS OF SUSSEX is TREMENDOUSLY successful in assuming worldwide fame and global dominance TOTALLY on her own! *snark*

She could have worn her Holstein dress, too.

Sad miscalculated days.

I can't believe Harry and Meghan are not on social media, getting their "brand" and "voice" out directly to the world. Are they trying to create some kind of royal mystique around themselves? If so, I'm not sure it's working.

Any sense of mystique with those two flew out the window and was pulverized into mush by a semi with their festival of lies featuring Meg's puffy face, Harry's rumbled suit and Oprah Winfrey badly pretending none of it was rehearsed.

They don't really have a voice or mystique because they are out of the monarchy. Now they just sound like any other celebrities, and a lot of unknowns, bleating about the same topic. Unlike a celebrity, they have no talent to sell, just their own thoughts, and those speak for themselves.

They never had anything particularly unique to say, or any ability to say the usual uniquely, and they gave up the only platform that compensated for that.

If she really wanted to make a difference in the world she should become a Weight Watchers spokesperson or something and help fellow fatties. Seriously, if she devoted her life to healthy weight and diabetes etc. it could make a difference, because she obviously struggles with it herself. When you look at her father and her own age, she's possibly the next Elizabeth Taylor, from the shoulders down. So own it. What was Liz Taylor when she took on AIDS? A fat joke. She reignited her prominence and worth by doing good work specific to one cause and sticking with it.

But if they had social media they could at least construct a sort of facade.

Honestly, I think Meghan should just pivot back to lifestyle stuff. The activism is dreary.

The problem with social media is that people could easily reply back. So they had to delete comments or block accounts.

A website is one-way communication. It's harder for people to quote press releases from a website that it is to quote an Instagram post.

Who goes on websites anymore? Besides, I think the old Meghan enjoyed the immediacy and creative aspect of Instagram. They should just do it and turn off commenting.

So, today was the first day of the Daily Mail's appeal of the ruling that favoured Meghan. There were some interesting developments. The Mail has new witness statements that assert Meghan wrote the letter to her father with intention of it being leaked to the press and earlier than she claims. It is also claimed that Jason Knauff (her former aide) was asked to help draft the letter so it made her look sympathetic. Also it alleges that Meghan begin collaborating with Omid Scobie on Finding Freedom right after the wedding and not in 2019. One of the Mails Lawyers made a snide comment about it's interesting that all Meghan's letters (to her father, to congress, etc.) always end up going public........tomorrow Meghan's legal team is allowed to rebuttal and it's believed that Meghan has written a new statement which will be presented tomorrow and I'm sure it will go public......oh also, the Judge accused Meghan's legal time of leaking information about the case to media outlets and reminded them that there is a blackout on the specific contents of the witness statements.

Still can't believe Harry fell for it.

So according to Jason Knauff's new statement, Meghan directed him to write the letter knowing she was going to allow her friends to leak it. Royal reporters are saying this is perhaps a sign the Palace no longer has "any fucks to give" and it's open season if they wish to talk about Meghan!!!!!!

Where is this? Because that is kind of awesome.

The article in R194 has some details but also it's being broke down by Royal Reporters on Twitter. One interesting point being brought up too is that MM initially denied she had any involvement in Finding Freedom but later amended that saying she did authroize a friend to speak to Omid Scobie....now the new witness statements from the Mail are saying that Meghan's PA Sara Latham proofread Finding Freedom!!!!!!

I think Meghan is still going to win the appeal sadly, but I think the Mail now is just going to air as much of her dirty laundry as possible.

WOW!!!! Dan Wootton has had enough...reveals how desperate Meghan was to get into the British tabloids BEFORE she even met Prince Harry.

R199 I never heard this before!! So apparently Meghan tried to plant a seed that former football player Ashley Cole was persuing her.

r199 Indeed and why does she pay Sunshine sachs to her stories of her and Harry in the tabloids several times a week?? She is the ultimate phoney. Reeks of insincerity and craves being seen as a victim. The tabloids fact check her and don't just accept her narrative and allegations that she puts out there. Fact checking is bad if your a liar is Meghans real position.

I saw a clip of Meghan's appearance at today's woman economic parity event, and you can tell she's angry during a lot of it. The interviewer went of script several time and asked her questions about her lawsuit against the Daily Mail and about the bullying allegations. He asked her want kind of boss she is, and she tried to bypass the question.

R202 In the bullying allegations question she apparently referred to The Times as a tabloid............also she was wearing a UK style poppy...the desperation to still be seen as part of the royal family continues.

WTF is this...Harry claimed he warned that Twitter was being used to stage the Jan 6 coup?!

Drugs

Meghan is trying to do fake humanitarian work because she knows her bullying antics while she was in the RF briefly are about to be released publicly in the next year or so.

Harry is the modern day Cassandra!

Harry saying he tried to stop the attack on the Capitol reminds me of how Mark Wahlberg claims he could have stopped 9/11.

H is shit talking Jack because he refused to censor the twitter accounts who report on Harkle bullshit. Vindictive asshole. ""

Holy shit! Can't believe Markle didn't scoop up Wallis' cartier.

You know Megsie wanted it. Someone must have been able to talk sense into her about the bad optics of purchasing something once owned by Wallis Simpson.

Caught out again.

Duchess of Sussex apologises to court for forgetting she authorised senior aide to brief authors of her biography Then-press secretary Jason Knauf said in witness statement to Court of Appeal that Sussexes had 'authorised specific cooperation in writing'

By Hannah Furness, ROYAL CORRESPONDENT 10 November 2021 • 3:30pm

The Duchess of Sussex has apologised to the British court for failing to remember that she authorised a senior aide to brief the authors of her biography.

The Duchess, who has previously insisted through lawyers that there was no collaboration with the authors of Finding Freedom, said she had forgotten email exchanges with her then-press secretary Jason Knauf about a meeting.

In a witness statement to the Court of Appeal, Mr Knauf said the Duke and Duchess of Sussex had "authorised specific cooperation in writing" in December 2018.

Emails show that Mr Knauf advised that putting the authors of the book, Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, in touch with the Duchess's friends was "not a good idea", telling them: "Being able to say hand on heart that we did not facilitate access will be important.”

The Duke, in reply, said "I totally agree that we have to be able to say we didn’t have anything to do with it", but added: "Equally, you giving the right context and background to them would help get some truths out there."

Part 2 A list of briefing points sent by the Duchess to Mr Knauf to discuss with the authors included information on her relationship with her half-siblings and father, and details of a row over her wedding tiara.

The Duke wrote: "Also, are u planning on giving them a rough idea of what she’s been through over the last 2yrs? Media onslaught, cyber bullying on a different scale, puppeteering Thomas Markle etc etc etc.

"Even if they choose not to use it, they should hear what it was like from someone who was in the thick of it. So if you aren’t planning on telling them, can I ?!"

In her new witness statement, having seen the written evidence provided by her former aide, the Duchess accepted that Mr Knauf did brief the authors of Finding Freedom and did so with her knowledge.

"I apologise to the Court for the fact that I had not remembered these exchanges at the time," she said. "I had absolutely no wish or intention to mislead the Defendant or the Court."

In fact, she said, had she known about the emails she would have been "more than happy to refer to them" as "strongly" supporting of her case.

"Not only do I refer to the background information shared with Mr Knauf as “reminders”, as much of it was information that he had already requested of me dating back to 2016 when he had asked me for a timeline relating to my family to enable him to engage with the media on enquiries, it is also a far cry from the very detailed personal information that the Defendant alleges that I wanted or permitted to put into the public domain."

Part 3

Question raised on Finding Freedom cooperation On the question of whether the Duke and Duchess of Sussex cooperated with the biography Finding Freedom, Mr Knauf said they had "authorised specific cooperation in writing" in December 2018.

Emails show that Mr Knauf advised that putting the authors of the book, Omid Scobie (pictured below) and Carolyn Durand, in touch with the Duchess's friends was "not a good idea", telling them: "Being able to say hand on heart that we did not facilitate access will be important.”

The Duke, in reply, said "I totally agree that we have to be able to say we didn’t have anything to do with it", but added: "Equally, you giving the right context and background to them would help get some truths out there."

A list of briefing points sent by the Duchess to Mr Knauf to discuss with the authors included information on her relationship with her half-siblings and father, and details of a row over her wedding tiara.

There's more in the article but it's a rehash of what we know.

I'd love to see the email details about the tiara.

The email details about the tiara are on Roya Nikkah’s Twitter feed. Meghan’s version of it, anyway.

Apparently, Meghan at a last minute wanted to try on the tiara wi8thout making an appointment to do so. She and Harry had a fit and took it out on a staff person who is close to the Queen. That is when the Queen spoke to Harry about his behavior.

In the one paragraph write-up of the tiara story, Meghan uses the phrase "very special" twice. When they were still on Instagram, she used the phrase "very special" in almost every post. She's obsessed with making the public associate that phrase with her.

Big as a house!

That dress is just all wrong.

You can see her white side boob where her fake tan ends. The dress is the same shade as the carpet.

Can we stop with the Meghan is fat stuff...she's not fat. Yes she's put on weight but she is 40 and just had a baby. That being said...WOW her stylist must truly hate her. WTF is this dress.

She is fat. I don’t judge it because she’s 40 and had a baby recently.

I don’t think MM uses a stylist.

She's probably thinner than 95 % of women her age. Have you been to your local Wal-Mart lately?

It's her ego that's the size of the moon

She’s probably a size 6, an 8 at most at her height. She’s not fat by any means.

She can’t possibly have a stylist!

She knows she’s fat. Why else did she cover her fat ass with a vagina cape?

She's got rolls of fat.

No way is she a size 6 or 8. But, as others have noted, if she wore clothing that fits her, she would look good.

She looks good in red, though red on a red carpet is a questionable choice. However, the dress is not attractive and it's ill-fitting, like most of what she wears. Her employing a stylist would be a waste of money because she would no doubt ignore their advice.