Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
GHScorpiosRule

From Across The Pond: Royal Weddings and Scandals

Recommended Posts

IIRC, Louise was born prematurely and was rushed to a NICU at another hospital.  The Queen broke the long-standing practice of never going to a hospital to meet a grandchild by visiting Louise in the NICU.

  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, Crs97 said:

IIRC, Louise was born prematurely and was rushed to a NICU at another hospital.  The Queen broke the long-standing practice of never going to a hospital to meet a grandchild by visiting Louise in the NICU.

I didn’t remember this- thank you!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
38 minutes ago, Crs97 said:

IIRC, Louise was born prematurely and was rushed to a NICU at another hospital.  The Queen broke the long-standing practice of never going to a hospital to meet a grandchild by visiting Louise in the NICU.

Sophie began bleeding from a placental abruption, a situation where the placenta separates from the uterine wall before the baby is born which can be life threatening to both mother and baby.  If I'm not mistaken, Sophie hemorrhaged and went into shock and was herself in intensive care and needed transfusions.  Sophie was hospitalized for more than 2 weeks after her cesarean section when the normal hospital stay would be 3-4 days.  Prince Edward missed the birth due to the emergency situation and baby Louise had to be transferred to a different hospital after birth due to her need for neonatal intensive care which underscores the seriousness of the situation, especially since her mother couldn't be with her for a couple weeks due to her own precarious health due to the complications.

Edited by doodlebug
  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post

A month early.  I think Edward was away on an official trip so missed the birth.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Sophie had an ectopic pregnancy too before Lady Louise was born.    Given all those issues, it is nice to see both kids happy and healthy.   

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post

Her eye issue may have been the result of that birth, and to their credit, Prince Edward and Sophie kept Louise out of the limelight for the longest time.  Her eyes have now been surgically repaired.  

Of course, they kept James out of the limelight too.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, roamyn said:

Her eye issue may have been the result of that birth, and to their credit, Prince Edward and Sophie kept Louise out of the limelight for the longest time.  Her eyes have now been surgically repaired.  

It was.  Sophie spoke of it in an interview.  It's why she's involved on an international basis with vision care.  

https://www.hellomagazine.com/royalty/2015101227656/sophie-wessex-lady-louise-eye-problems/

Edited by MissAlmond · Reason: included link
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
18 hours ago, truthaboutluv said:

My guess is her little trip to England earlier this year was the final straw. They probably figured Samantha was harmless and just an annoying gnat while all she was doing was tweeting and blabbering to any gutter press that would entertain her, as long as it was done all the way across the pond. Not to mention she is wheelchair bound.

I agree Samantha's trip to Italy/England was the tipping point.  Samantha hides behind her wheelchair as a shield for her bad behavior. Crossing the pond and showing up outside Kensington Gardens with a boyfriend who has a criminal record rendered the shield useless.  

 

18 hours ago, truthaboutluv said:

But that little stunt with the loser, so called "publicist" (who unsurprisingly has quickly extricated himself from that sinking ship) was a step too far. Not only did she show up at Kensington Gardens but the tweet the guy sent before hand very much could have been read as threatening, with their essentially demanding they be given an audience with Meghan "or else"'.

Rob Cooper dropped Samantha like a rock. Makes me wonder if the Kensington Garden stunt was Samantha's idea, not his.   Cooper pushed the envelope with his tweet and arranging for Samantha's interview, but Sam actually showing up at outside Kensington Garden probably crossed a line Cooper wasn't willing to risk.  

Edited by MissAlmond
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

But the Other Markle DID cause a stink to not only her own relative but the Duke of Sussex,too so her being on that list is completely justified. As long as she stays away from the couple, she has nothing to worry about so IMO she has no case for a suit. However; it's possible she may have found a lawyer willing to tell her what she wants to hear in the hopes of getting a retainer ($$) from her. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, Blergh said:

retainer ($$) from her. 

It’s all about the billable hour. Keep them complaining and watch those hours add up. 

It’s sad that she doesn’t know when to quit. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Blergh said:

However; it's possible she may have found a lawyer willing to tell her what she wants to hear in the hopes of getting a retainer ($$) from her. 

Of course there's a lawyer out there willing to take her money case.  Remember when Jr retained a lawyer to plead with Meghan to get in touch with him?  How Jr couldn't find work and needed Meghan's and the palace's help to takedown negative media stories about him?  Those lawyers were basically told by Harry's people, too bad so sad for Jr's troubles, take it up with the media companies.  The lawyers then got back to Jr., told him how expensive that would be, so if "his sister" wasn't willing to help pay the legal fees, ta ta for now.  

Quote

It’s sad that she doesn’t know when to quit. 

Samantha is acting like this is visitation rights to a minor child.  You can't force an adult to have a relationship with people they don't want in their lives, regardless of how they're related.  

Edited by MissAlmond
  • Like 17

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, Crs97 said:

IIRC, Louise was born prematurely and was rushed to a NICU at another hospital.  The Queen broke the long-standing practice of never going to a hospital to meet a grandchild by visiting Louise in the NICU.

Didn't the Queen visit the hospital when William was born?  I have some memory of Charles greeting her on the hospital steps.  Maybe I'm mixing up memories though!  I do know that she rarely visits people in the hospital, even when the hospitalized person is her husband.  I'm sure the disruption a visit from the Queen causes makes her reluctant to go.  

 

5 hours ago, MissAlmond said:

Samantha is acting like this is visitation rights to a minor child.  You can't force an adult to have a relationship with people they don't want in their lives, regardless of how they're related.  

There is a name for this type of behavior.  It's called stalking.  If she creates some type of situation during the tour of Canada and America later this year, she should be told that while Harry and Meghan - and baby! - are in the US,, the Secret Service will be part of their security, and you don't want to mess with them. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, Calvada said:

Didn't the Queen visit the hospital when William was born?  I have some memory of Charles greeting her on the hospital steps.  Maybe I'm mixing up memories though!  I do know that she rarely visits people in the hospital, even when the hospitalized person is her husband.  I'm sure the disruption a visit from the Queen causes makes her reluctant to go.  

 

There is a name for this type of behavior.  It's called stalking.  If she creates some type of situation during the tour of Canada and America later this year, she should be told that while Harry and Meghan - and baby! - are in the US,, the Secret Service will be part of their security, and you don't want to mess with them. 

No, the Queen didn't visit William.  Diana left the hospital less than a day after the birth; just as Kate has done.  Maybe she visited William when he had surgery for a skull fracture as a child?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, Calvada said:

If she creates some type of situation during the tour of Canada and America later this year, she should be told that while Harry and Meghan - and baby! - are in the US,, the Secret Service will be part of their security, and you don't want to mess with them. 

Not sure if Secret Service travels with them.   They have their own protection officers who are no slouches.    I am quite sure though "that woman" will be told she is under surveillance during the time the Sussexes are in the US.   

Yes she hides behind her wheelchair and claims she can't be a threat.   But somehow "that wheelchair bound woman" managed to get to Kensington Palace.   Sure the public side, but that was close enough to show that her wheelchair is no deterrent to getting where she wants to be.   She can TALK all she wants, no one is saying she can't.   And nothing will happen to her as long as all she does is run her mouth.   But if she does more than talk, well, there's a head's up to make sure she doesn't actually get near any of the Royal Family.   

Why is she doing this?   Because she's a narcissist.   When baby Meghan came along, there was another cute little girl in the family and "that woman" wasn't the center of attention any more.   Then Megan turned out to be a nice, NOT self-centered child and everyone liked to be around her.   Unlike "that woman" whose own children don't use her name.   That just fueled the narcissism.   Now Meghan is a Duchess and the center of worldwide attention.   It is just too too much.   With the added bonus of tabloids being willing to pay her to feed her narcissistic obessession with Duchess Meghan.   The worst thing you can do to a narcissist is ignore them.   The tabs should try it.

  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, doodlebug said:

No, the Queen didn't visit William.  Diana left the hospital less than a day after the birth; just as Kate has done.  Maybe she visited William when he had surgery for a skull fracture as a child?

I think William also had surgery for a hernia at some point. I remember something like that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, merylinkid said:

Not sure if Secret Service travels with them.   They have their own protection officers who are no slouches. I am quite sure though "that woman" will be told she is under surveillance during the time the Sussexes are in the US.   

Yes she hides behind her wheelchair and claims she can't be a threat.   But somehow "that wheelchair bound woman" managed to get to Kensington Palace.   Sure the public side, but that was close enough to show that her wheelchair is no deterrent to getting where she wants to be.   She can TALK all she wants, no one is saying she can't.   And nothing will happen to her as long as all she does is run her mouth.   But if she does more than talk, well, there's a head's up to make sure she doesn't actually get near any of the Royal Family.   

Why is she doing this?   Because she's a narcissist.   When baby Meghan came along, there was another cute little girl in the family and "that woman" wasn't the center of attention any more.   Then Megan turned out to be a nice, NOT self-centered child and everyone liked to be around her.   Unlike "that woman" whose own children don't use her name.   That just fueled the narcissism.   Now Meghan is a Duchess and the center of worldwide attention.   It is just too too much.   With the added bonus of tabloids being willing to pay her to feed her narcissistic obessession with Duchess Meghan.   The worst thing you can do to a narcissist is ignore them.   The tabs should try it.

Yes, they have their own protection team which travels with them from their country but, according to this, protection for foreign dignitaries visiting the US is supplemented by members of the US Secret Service & people from the State Department. I seem to remember when Pope Francis visited the US, he had Secret Service protection. Plus, depending on when the Sussexes’ US trip might be scheduled for, Meghan will probably still be a British Duchess with American citizenship (which might have a bearing on her amount of Secret Service protection).

2 hours ago, Broken Ox said:

She reminds me of Betty Broderick.

Me too, now that you mention it. Especially in scenes from her biographical movies where she gets unhinged over her ex & his new wife, her kid(s) turning against her, etc. Meredith Baxter got at least 1 Emmy nomination for those movies, as I remember. It was/they were very well-deserved in my opinion.

Edited by BW Manilowe · Reason: To change singular possessive to plural possessive in 1 place.
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

FTR, I don't believe the RPO's actually guarding any of the royals said one word to Roya Nikkah.  I think she spun the article as if she had.   IMO, her "sources" are either former members of Scotland Yard or current ones who work detail elsewhere.  Both would know the criteria for what qualifies to be considered fixated/stalker. Samantha certainly met all of them once she crossed the pond and paid a visit to Kensington Gardens.  

So I do believe Samantha is on such a list.  But I also believe Roya wrote the article for clicks.  Every royal gossipmonger knows by now what triggers Samantha to lose it on social media.  Gossipmongers get more stories/income while Scotland Yard gathers even more evidence.  

1 hour ago, BW Manilowe said:

Meredith Baxter got at least 1 Emmy nomination for those movies, as I remember. It was/they were very well-deserved in my opinion.

Meredith Baxter deserved all the Emmy's for her portrayal of Betty Broderick.  ROBBED.  

Edited by MissAlmond
  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, BW Manilowe said:

Apparently this moron thinks her "freedom of speech" rights in America (which I'm sure she doesn't even understand) carry over to other countries. Does the UK even have any "freedom of speech" laws?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Last night's episode of the show Lethal Weapon had a scene in which the captain was taking care of Murtaugh's toddler daughter, and we see him telling her a story:  ".....and then, she left her show on USA, and then, she married a Prince, and they lived happily ever after.......".  Funny.

  • Like 19

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, GaT said:

Apparently this moron thinks her "freedom of speech" rights in America (which I'm sure she doesn't even understand) carry over to other countries. Does the UK even have any "freedom of speech" laws?

According to this, the British have freedom of speech like people in most every country. But they don’t have anything like the First Amendment, which guarantees free speech.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
20 hours ago, Broken Ox said:

She reminds me of Betty Broderick.

Yes! Wow I had forgotten her. That was some mess.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, ChiCricket said:

Yes! Wow I had forgotten her. That was some mess.

Betty Broderick still sits in jail today because she can't even pretend to say "I'm sorry" at parole hearings.  I can see this becoming Samantha's future.  Not the murder, but holding on to the obsession 30 years later.  

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post

To think if the Other Markle had been even half as obsessed to stay in her children's lives as she is in drawing attention to herself, they'd want her in theirs and be making her declining years more comfortable. 

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎12‎/‎21‎/‎2018 at 8:03 AM, truthaboutluv said:

One week People Magazine was writing how Meghan is so isolated and has lost all friends because she doesn't know who she can trust and the next week, apparently she quietly flew to Canada where she hung out with all her close friends from her years living in Toronto.

Any article that claims knowledge of Meghan's friendships (or lack thereof), but fails to acknowledge the Litt girls as bridesmaids and why, automatically gets a pass from me.  

Edited by MissAlmond
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

I assume the people who want Charles to abdicate just want to get rid of the monarchy altogether because William can’t seem to get up enough energy to attend a grocery store grand opening, much less deal with being King.

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Crs97 said:

I assume the people who want Charles to abdicate just want to get rid of the monarchy altogether because William can’t seem to get up enough energy to attend a grocery store grand opening, much less deal with being King.

I’m assuming they don’t want Camilla to be “Queen” & can’t wait for Diana’s kid to be king.

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post

Also, Charles is 70 years old. The Queen doesn't look like she's going to abdicate in the near future, so by the time he gets to be King, he may only end up being King for a couple of years when he's not in the best health. Then everyone would have to go through the whole new monarch thing again when he died. It may just be easier to go straight to William.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, GaT said:

Also, Charles is 70 years old. The Queen doesn't look like she's going to abdicate in the near future, so by the time he gets to be King, he may only end up being King for a couple of years when he's not in the best health. Then everyone would have to go through the whole new monarch thing again when he died. It may just be easier to go straight to William.

Given that both his parents are in their nineties, it's possible that Charles could have a very long reign if he took the throne in, say, a few years.  I think as @Tanichka noted, they just don't want Camilla to be Queen, even if they've accepted her as his wife.   

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
34 minutes ago, GaT said:

Also, Charles is 70 years old. The Queen doesn't look like she's going to abdicate in the near future, so by the time he gets to be King, he may only end up being King for a couple of years when he's not in the best health. Then everyone would have to go through the whole new monarch thing again when he died. It may just be easier to go straight to William.

Except both of Charles' parents are still alive and at 92 the Queen is still active and working. And Charles now at 70 does almost three times the number of engagement and work that William does. I mean if they make him King immediately, will people still use the "he and Kate have three kids and they're part-time royals" line? Or will he finally be expected to step up like the Queen and Charles have been doing for years? 

I agree with others that this is simply down to people not liking Charles for the "Diana/Camilla" saga and I know there are some political figures who've felt he's over stepped over the years in relation to some political issues. I think people just see the "pretty, shiny, perfect family" with William and Kate and three kids and figure he'll be better because they just need them to stand there and look good. Or at least that's how I've seen some refer to the royals. 

Of course the last time the U.K. voted to make a significant change, that hasn't worked out too well. Just saying...

Edited by truthaboutluv
  • Like 14

Share this post


Link to post

It really drives me crazy that the same people who want Charles’ and Camilla’s heads for cheating don’t care at all that Diana also had affairs during their marriage and slept with married men after her divorce.  At least pretend to be consistent.

  • Like 21

Share this post


Link to post

During their Twitter meltdown, certain gossipmongers went on about what does the public know about BTS with the royals?  The public thought Charles/Diana's marriage was fine until "they" revealed the truth.  Excuse me gossipmongers, but I knew (and so did my mother/grandmother)  things weren't right between Charles and Diana during their courtship! We knew it wasn't just the Palace pushing this relationship too, it was also the tabloids.  How they've forgotten all those stories they used to publish about how perfect Diana was.  

And who knows?  There was a period when Charles and Diana were happy.  Maybe if the tabloids had laid off this fragile woman and treated her as a human being instead of a commodity to sell papers, this mismatched couple might have managed to reconcile their differences under the cloak of privacy.  But that never happened and Diana fell for the tabloids biggest con.  To come to them in order for her side of the story to be told.  Which they did, until they attacked again, this time using Diana's very cooperation as the reason she didn't deserve privacy or sympathy.  Then, when Diana died and the public pointed fingers at their tactics, the tabloids did a "Squirrel" and started going on about why wasn't the flag lowered at Buckingham Palace.  Most of the public bought it, but I remembered what they did.

Fast forward to today, a new royal bride, and the tabs are still operating on their old model.  Anyone who doubts this didn't pay attention to Richard "I'm A Journalist, Damnit!" Palmer's recent rantings. Palmer always reveals too much when he loses it. They will rip a royal to shreds until said royal gives them scoops in order to make them stop.  Which they will for a hot second, then it's back to whatever it is that (now) provides clicks.  That's how the game is played with them.  Or it was in the past.  The Internet and social media has changed a lot of things and it's clear the gossipmongers aren't happy about it.  They're not used to the pushback, they're angry they can't control the narrative.  They will get called out and snarky comments about being a sugar won't stop those of us who see and recognize the secret in the sauce.  They think they're so clever while we're stupid.  Hah!  

So yes, Charles and Diana had a bad marriage.  All three involved have nothing to be proud of how they acted during those times.   But Charles has done a lot of good work for the UK and so has Camilla.  They will make a fine king/queen consort.  

Edited by MissAlmond
  • Like 18

Share this post


Link to post

I read “Prince Charles: The Passions and Paradoxes of an Improbable Life” a while back and one of the things I came away with was that Prince Charles and Diana were incompatible people pushed together when they shouldn’t have been. He was facing pressure to settle down and marry a “respectable”(read white, Protestant and virgin) wife. She was young and had a naive vision of what life in the royal family was going to be like, along with baggage from her parents and their rocky marriage and seperation.

  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post

Miss Almond,

 Very insightful post. I have to agree with you up to the last sentence.  

It seems the current Queen (and her consort) are FAR more independent and able to do everyday things for themselves even in their 90s than the Prince of Wales has ever been.  I mean the Queen could take apart and re-assemble a truck engine while Charles needs seven eggs boiled at once so he can pick the correct one  to eat like Goldlocks.  Hence I think he and Camilla will make a fair king/ princess consort (though I truly hope they just get on with it and make her a queen consort) .

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Blergh said:

It seems the current Queen (and her consort) are FAR more independent and able to do everyday things for themselves even in their 90s than the Prince of Wales has ever been.  I mean the Queen could take apart and re-assemble a truck engine while Charles needs seven eggs boiled at once so he can pick the correct one  to eat like Goldlocks.  Hence I think he and Camilla will make a fair king/ princess consort (though I truly hope they just get on with it and make her a queen consort) .

It was Charles who cared about what happened to those living in London's inner city in the 70's.  Charles who continued to pay visits there after the 2011 London riots.  Charles who today is trying to get to the root cause of the knife attacks and do something about it.  The tabloids rarely cover the good work his Prince's Trust has done and how many it has helped over the years.  I guess it isn't dramatic enough.

Edited by MissAlmond
  • Like 23

Share this post


Link to post
On January 4, 2019 at 7:05 AM, MissAlmond said:

The Prince's Trust support in helping Idris Elba to the screen is worth Charles' coronation alone.  

 

I agree. God save the King.

Edited by Macbeth
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/4/2019 at 8:35 AM, Crs97 said:

It really drives me crazy that the same people who want Charles’ and Camilla’s heads for cheating don’t care at all that Diana also had affairs during their marriage and slept with married men after her divorce.  At least pretend to be consistent.

You're forgetting Diana's carefully cultivated "poor me, I'm the victim and therefore blameless" image. She may have started out innocent, but she quickly learned the rules of the game. That doesn't mean her death wasn't tragic, and I feel sorry that's the way her life ended.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎1‎/‎3‎/‎2019 at 6:59 PM, truthaboutluv said:

I think people just see the "pretty, shiny, perfect family" with William and Kate and three kids and figure he'll be better because they just need them to stand there and look good.

Since the royals are mostly figureheads (I know they do charity work), I can see why William, Kate, and their children would be preferable to Charles and Camilla.  I think Diana got more sympathy than Charles because she was 19, and he was a man in his 30s.  It didn't help that they were billed as this great fairytale love match, and then the real truth came out.

It's kind of amusing that William and Kate are considered part-time royals because they spend time with their children.  I remember Charles getting criticized for not being as serious and responsible as his mother.  Diana being praised for being the "People's Princess" and then Diana and Fergie getting criticized for being to "common" and "free spirited."  Then when William first started dating Kate, the comments about Kate being a "commoner" not royalty or part of the nobility (oh the horrors - insert eyeroll), and called Waitie Katie.  Which somewhat backfired on the vultures when William and Kate broke up, and Kate was seen out partying every week with other guys, and William actually had to put effort into getting her back.

Now they are targeting poor Meghan with their venom, and that she beast half-sister of hers is more than willing to help them out.

  • Like 18

Share this post


Link to post

If the Cambridges were doing engagements at the rate of Charles or Anne, the tabloids would be lambasting them for not paying enough attention to the their children.  If Meghan comes back to work 6 or 8 weeks after the baby is born, suddenly there would be an avalanche of stories about how bad that is for the child.  I'm sure that after the baby is born, the tabloids will have stories about her losing the baby weight - either too quickly or not quickly enough.  When William was a baby, I think at the time he went on the Australia tour with Charles and Diana, there was an article which had "experts" saying he was overweight and speculating about what he was being fed.  William never seemed to be anything but a perfectly healthy kid to me.

It's evident that no matter what they do, what they say, what they wear, there will always be criticism.  And it's always cyclical,  Meghan seems to be the target now; in 6 months, whose turn will it be?  Catherine?  William?  Charles?  Camilla?  Harry?  

I wonder if William and Catherine plan to follow the educational path that William had for their children.  If so, that means that George will be going to boarding school in 3 years.  It's no wonder they want to have this time with their children now.  The Queen and the Prince of Wales fully support that IMO.  If they didn't, we would see the Cambridges doing a lot more engagements.  

  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/6/2019 at 9:17 AM, TigerLynx said:

Since the royals are mostly figureheads (I know they do charity work)

Just saw this article.

(I had to look up what a patronage was)

"Meghan Markle is kicking off the new year with a major new royal responsibility. The Duchess of Sussex is reportedly taking over for the Queen as royal patron of the National Theatre"

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a25778868/meghan-markle-first-royal-patronage-national-theater/

And then this:

"Meghan Markle's half-brother is doing his best to reunite his torn family.

Thomas Markle Jr. is formally inviting his little sister to his March nuptials in a last-ditch attempt to resolve the ongoing Markle family feud. The 52-year-old revealed to the Daily Mail that he and his fiancée, Darlene Blount, sent an invite across the pond to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex in the hopes that their presence would help to "put all the past behind everybody and move on and be a closer family again."

https://www.eonline.com/news/1003264/meghan-markle-s-brother-invites-her-and-prince-harry-to-his-wedding

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, ChiCricket said:

And then this:

"Meghan Markle's half-brother is doing his best to reunite his torn family.

Thomas Markle Jr. is formally inviting his little sister to his March nuptials in a last-ditch attempt to resolve the ongoing Markle family feud. The 52-year-old revealed to the Daily Mail that he and his fiancée, Darlene Blount, sent an invite across the pond to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex in the hopes that their presence would help to "put all the past behind everybody and move on and be a closer family again."

https://www.eonline.com/news/1003264/meghan-markle-s-brother-invites-her-and-prince-harry-to-his-wedding

Isn't she going to be super pregnant and probably past her fly date by then? Even if she wanted to come, but medically couldn't, they'll still use that to frame her as a stuck-up bitch. And "putting the past behind everybody" is just rug sweeping; it doesn't solve anything. They are all just shameless opportunists.

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, GaT said:

He's baaack 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8123266/meghan-markle-dad-thomas-phonecall-plea/

I think that "fixated" list is going to have another member soon.

Wow.    How about you try shutting up FIRST.   Then maybe they will speak to you.   Maybe.   If they can trust you.    But threatening to keep talking UNLESS they talk to you is a really manipulative thing to do.   

Meghan needs to stay far away from these people.   Even if she weren't pregnant she shouldn't go to that wedding.   They would have the tabs staking it out and make sure to cast anything Meghan did in the most unflattering light.   Why put up with people who don't care about you and really only want to use you?

 

Some positive royal news:   Happy Birthday Duchess Kate.

Edited by merylinkid
  • Like 21

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×