Meghan Markle and Prince Harry News and Updates Part 4

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nope. Not Barbados. It just declared its independence.

(Great beaches by the way)

That’s the point. The Commonwealth does not want or need Barbados just as it does not want or need Prince Harry and his spouse.

Great! Then they won’t care as more and more countries leave the commonwealth. Pretty soon all that will be left is one single cold island.

Duh, that's the point. The Queen has been trying to get rid of the drag from the Commonwealth countries so that they can downsize the monarchy. Try to keep up.

Oh honey…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I interviewed with them for a position. I went in thinking they were awful and believing everything written about them. Honestly they were just so nice. I didn’t get the job, but wish that I did. They were the complete opposite of who I expected them to be. No I will not reveal any more info or what position I applied for, I just wanted to say -whether you believe me or not- that they are actually really nice. Jeff can even tell you I previously participated in this thread maybe a year ago bashing them a couple times. I feel bad about that now.

I’m sure they are nice. Particularly Harry. And “nice” is probably part of Meghan’s brand. But it doesn’t mean she isn’t also self-righteous- I mean, who does she think she is calling senators directly about paid family leave?

This is such an odd think to say…senators work for us, we the people are their bosses. Joe public can call any senator and state their position on any legislation!

DP. I agree that Meghan Markle can call every senator if she wants to. Meghan the Duchess of Sussex is a different story. She has no business calling any senator. She may be very nice (until she throws tea at you) but she's also blinded by her self-importance.

Or maybe she realizes nasty, jealous people on the internet will obsess over her no matter what she does, so may as well use her notoriety for good? I mean, it has you talking about paid family leave. She could solve world hunger and y’all would call her the devil.

So tell me what positive effect her Duchess phone calls had.

Well it has you probably thinking about paid family leave for the first time 😀

No, tool box. Most average working mothers didn’t, in fact, need a soap opera actress who married former British royalty to tell them women should be paid leave after having a child. Get a clue. How out of touch can you be?

I know you are trying to insult me but I just feel sad for you.

DP. You went for patronizing, but belly-flopped into “I got nothing” territory.

No not trying to be patronizing at all. It’s really sad the amount of hatred you people have for someone you don’t know.

DP. This. And how they keep going on and on about her. Somebody they hate and constantly talk so much $hiittttt about. It is absolutely wild.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Something I keep thinking about is how the number one attack against Meghan is some iteration of, "I thought she wanted privacy? Why is she in the news/speaking/opening her mouth/getting pictures taken of her?" But neither she nor Harry have EVER even spoken about it. And yet you will consistently find this criticism of them in nearly every single comment section on the internet that pertains to the Sussexes. Shows just how pervasive the toxic influence of the tabloid press can be.

People say “I thought they wanted privacy” because they have complained about the invasion of their privacy and their press coverage. The reality is worse. They have a desperate need for publicity, but whine like children when it isn’t flattering. They want to attack other people, but cry foul when they fight back. Most people revert to the “privacy” argument because they are sane people who realize that you have to take the bad with the good publicity when you choose to live a public life and publicly criticize people who are in a position to get their own side of the story out. They moved to the US because they thought they could do a better job of controlling their PR here. But that doesn’t help when you continue to do dumb things (lie to the Court, call Senators using your title, etc).

When have they ever said anything even remotely similar to, “I would like to leave the public eye” — they haven’t. Everyone is entitled to basic levels of privacy, and they’re hardly the first public figures to speak about invasions of such. It’s just nonsensical illogic.

The biggest invasion of their privacy came from them. They told us about their miscarriage, and peeing in the bushes, and the genetic pain brought by their family, and the racism and on and on. They never shut up. They have an opinion on everything and pay a pretty penny to disseminate it. They bring on frivolous lawsuits wasting taxpayer money for personal letters intended to make their narrative public.

No privacy was invaded in the UK, they did not like the press they got. They don’t like the free press or the first amendment.

+1000000

Plus Megan knew what she was getting into prior to marriage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I interviewed with them for a position. I went in thinking they were awful and believing everything written about them. Honestly they were just so nice. I didn’t get the job, but wish that I did. They were the complete opposite of who I expected them to be. No I will not reveal any more info or what position I applied for, I just wanted to say -whether you believe me or not- that they are actually really nice. Jeff can even tell you I previously participated in this thread maybe a year ago bashing them a couple times. I feel bad about that now.

I’m sure they are nice. Particularly Harry. And “nice” is probably part of Meghan’s brand. But it doesn’t mean she isn’t also self-righteous- I mean, who does she think she is calling senators directly about paid family leave?

This is such an odd think to say…senators work for us, we the people are their bosses. Joe public can call any senator and state their position on any legislation!

DP. I agree that Meghan Markle can call every senator if she wants to. Meghan the Duchess of Sussex is a different story. She has no business calling any senator. She may be very nice (until she throws tea at you) but she's also blinded by her self-importance.

Or maybe she realizes nasty, jealous people on the internet will obsess over her no matter what she does, so may as well use her notoriety for good? I mean, it has you talking about paid family leave. She could solve world hunger and y’all would call her the devil.

So tell me what positive effect her Duchess phone calls had.

Well it has you probably thinking about paid family leave for the first time 😀

No, tool box. Most average working mothers didn’t, in fact, need a soap opera actress who married former British royalty to tell them women should be paid leave after having a child. Get a clue. How out of touch can you be?

I know you are trying to insult me but I just feel sad for you.

DP. You went for patronizing, but belly-flopped into “I got nothing” territory.

No not trying to be patronizing at all. It’s really sad the amount of hatred you people have for someone you don’t know.

DP. This. And how they keep going on and on about her. Somebody they hate and constantly talk so much $hiittttt about. It is absolutely wild.

Not much gets people as riled up as a phony, and almost everyone can detect when a person doesn't ring true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Something I keep thinking about is how the number one attack against Meghan is some iteration of, "I thought she wanted privacy? Why is she in the news/speaking/opening her mouth/getting pictures taken of her?" But neither she nor Harry have EVER even spoken about it. And yet you will consistently find this criticism of them in nearly every single comment section on the internet that pertains to the Sussexes. Shows just how pervasive the toxic influence of the tabloid press can be.

People say “I thought they wanted privacy” because they have complained about the invasion of their privacy and their press coverage. The reality is worse. They have a desperate need for publicity, but whine like children when it isn’t flattering. They want to attack other people, but cry foul when they fight back. Most people revert to the “privacy” argument because they are sane people who realize that you have to take the bad with the good publicity when you choose to live a public life and publicly criticize people who are in a position to get their own side of the story out. They moved to the US because they thought they could do a better job of controlling their PR here. But that doesn’t help when you continue to do dumb things (lie to the Court, call Senators using your title, etc).

When have they ever said anything even remotely similar to, “I would like to leave the public eye” — they haven’t. Everyone is entitled to basic levels of privacy, and they’re hardly the first public figures to speak about invasions of such. It’s just nonsensical illogic.

The biggest invasion of their privacy came from them. They told us about their miscarriage, and peeing in the bushes, and the genetic pain brought by their family, and the racism and on and on. They never shut up. They have an opinion on everything and pay a pretty penny to disseminate it. They bring on frivolous lawsuits wasting taxpayer money for personal letters intended to make their narrative public.

No privacy was invaded in the UK, they did not like the press they got. They don’t like the free press or the first amendment.

Who doesn’t want to be in control of what information they share? If you share some of aspects of your life does that mean you want the world outside your house, peering into your window documenting everything you do?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Something I keep thinking about is how the number one attack against Meghan is some iteration of, "I thought she wanted privacy? Why is she in the news/speaking/opening her mouth/getting pictures taken of her?" But neither she nor Harry have EVER even spoken about it. And yet you will consistently find this criticism of them in nearly every single comment section on the internet that pertains to the Sussexes. Shows just how pervasive the toxic influence of the tabloid press can be.

People say “I thought they wanted privacy” because they have complained about the invasion of their privacy and their press coverage. The reality is worse. They have a desperate need for publicity, but whine like children when it isn’t flattering. They want to attack other people, but cry foul when they fight back. Most people revert to the “privacy” argument because they are sane people who realize that you have to take the bad with the good publicity when you choose to live a public life and publicly criticize people who are in a position to get their own side of the story out. They moved to the US because they thought they could do a better job of controlling their PR here. But that doesn’t help when you continue to do dumb things (lie to the Court, call Senators using your title, etc).

When have they ever said anything even remotely similar to, “I would like to leave the public eye” — they haven’t. Everyone is entitled to basic levels of privacy, and they’re hardly the first public figures to speak about invasions of such. It’s just nonsensical illogic.

The biggest invasion of their privacy came from them. They told us about their miscarriage, and peeing in the bushes, and the genetic pain brought by their family, and the racism and on and on. They never shut up. They have an opinion on everything and pay a pretty penny to disseminate it. They bring on frivolous lawsuits wasting taxpayer money for personal letters intended to make their narrative public.

No privacy was invaded in the UK, they did not like the press they got. They don’t like the free press or the first amendment.

+1000000

Plus Megan knew what she was getting into prior to marriage.

No, but she didn’t! She didn’t look up Harry’s family at all. All she wanted to know was whether he was kind!!!! She had no idea what she was getting into. Not a clue!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Something I keep thinking about is how the number one attack against Meghan is some iteration of, "I thought she wanted privacy? Why is she in the news/speaking/opening her mouth/getting pictures taken of her?" But neither she nor Harry have EVER even spoken about it. And yet you will consistently find this criticism of them in nearly every single comment section on the internet that pertains to the Sussexes. Shows just how pervasive the toxic influence of the tabloid press can be.

People say “I thought they wanted privacy” because they have complained about the invasion of their privacy and their press coverage. The reality is worse. They have a desperate need for publicity, but whine like children when it isn’t flattering. They want to attack other people, but cry foul when they fight back. Most people revert to the “privacy” argument because they are sane people who realize that you have to take the bad with the good publicity when you choose to live a public life and publicly criticize people who are in a position to get their own side of the story out. They moved to the US because they thought they could do a better job of controlling their PR here. But that doesn’t help when you continue to do dumb things (lie to the Court, call Senators using your title, etc).

When have they ever said anything even remotely similar to, “I would like to leave the public eye” — they haven’t. Everyone is entitled to basic levels of privacy, and they’re hardly the first public figures to speak about invasions of such. It’s just nonsensical illogic.

The biggest invasion of their privacy came from them. They told us about their miscarriage, and peeing in the bushes, and the genetic pain brought by their family, and the racism and on and on. They never shut up. They have an opinion on everything and pay a pretty penny to disseminate it. They bring on frivolous lawsuits wasting taxpayer money for personal letters intended to make their narrative public.

No privacy was invaded in the UK, they did not like the press they got. They don’t like the free press or the first amendment.

Who doesn’t want to be in control of what information they share? If you share some of aspects of your life does that mean you want the world outside your house, peering into your window documenting everything you do?

When your job is to be in the news, and when there is a special set of the press corp that has an agreement with your employer, then no, you don't get to be in 100% of your press coverage. This is easy to understand. They didn't like it but it wasn't their place to change it.

So they left and moved to California, where they have even less control of their press coverage. Okay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Something I keep thinking about is how the number one attack against Meghan is some iteration of, "I thought she wanted privacy? Why is she in the news/speaking/opening her mouth/getting pictures taken of her?" But neither she nor Harry have EVER even spoken about it. And yet you will consistently find this criticism of them in nearly every single comment section on the internet that pertains to the Sussexes. Shows just how pervasive the toxic influence of the tabloid press can be.

People say “I thought they wanted privacy” because they have complained about the invasion of their privacy and their press coverage. The reality is worse. They have a desperate need for publicity, but whine like children when it isn’t flattering. They want to attack other people, but cry foul when they fight back. Most people revert to the “privacy” argument because they are sane people who realize that you have to take the bad with the good publicity when you choose to live a public life and publicly criticize people who are in a position to get their own side of the story out. They moved to the US because they thought they could do a better job of controlling their PR here. But that doesn’t help when you continue to do dumb things (lie to the Court, call Senators using your title, etc).

When have they ever said anything even remotely similar to, “I would like to leave the public eye” — they haven’t. Everyone is entitled to basic levels of privacy, and they’re hardly the first public figures to speak about invasions of such. It’s just nonsensical illogic.

The biggest invasion of their privacy came from them. They told us about their miscarriage, and peeing in the bushes, and the genetic pain brought by their family, and the racism and on and on. They never shut up. They have an opinion on everything and pay a pretty penny to disseminate it. They bring on frivolous lawsuits wasting taxpayer money for personal letters intended to make their narrative public.

No privacy was invaded in the UK, they did not like the press they got. They don’t like the free press or the first amendment.

Who doesn’t want to be in control of what information they share? If you share some of aspects of your life does that mean you want the world outside your house, peering into your window documenting everything you do?

When your job is to be in the news, and when there is a special set of the press corp that has an agreement with your employer, then no, you don't get to be in 100% of your press coverage. This is easy to understand. They didn't like it but it wasn't their place to change it.

So they left and moved to California, where they have even less control of their press coverage. Okay.

They seem to be sharing what they want to share about themselves instead of their information being leaked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I interviewed with them for a position. I went in thinking they were awful and believing everything written about them. Honestly they were just so nice. I didn’t get the job, but wish that I did. They were the complete opposite of who I expected them to be. No I will not reveal any more info or what position I applied for, I just wanted to say -whether you believe me or not- that they are actually really nice. Jeff can even tell you I previously participated in this thread maybe a year ago bashing them a couple times. I feel bad about that now.

I’m sure they are nice. Particularly Harry. And “nice” is probably part of Meghan’s brand. But it doesn’t mean she isn’t also self-righteous- I mean, who does she think she is calling senators directly about paid family leave?

This is such an odd think to say…senators work for us, we the people are their bosses. Joe public can call any senator and state their position on any legislation!

DP. I agree that Meghan Markle can call every senator if she wants to. Meghan the Duchess of Sussex is a different story. She has no business calling any senator. She may be very nice (until she throws tea at you) but she's also blinded by her self-importance.

Or maybe she realizes nasty, jealous people on the internet will obsess over her no matter what she does, so may as well use her notoriety for good? I mean, it has you talking about paid family leave. She could solve world hunger and y’all would call her the devil.

So tell me what positive effect her Duchess phone calls had.

Well it has you probably thinking about paid family leave for the first time 😀

No, tool box. Most average working mothers didn’t, in fact, need a soap opera actress who married former British royalty to tell them women should be paid leave after having a child. Get a clue. How out of touch can you be?

I know you are trying to insult me but I just feel sad for you.

DP. You went for patronizing, but belly-flopped into “I got nothing” territory.

No not trying to be patronizing at all. It’s really sad the amount of hatred you people have for someone you don’t know.

DP. This. And how they keep going on and on about her. Somebody they hate and constantly talk so much $hiittttt about. It is absolutely wild.

Not much gets people as riled up as a phony, and almost everyone can detect when a person doesn't ring true.

You (or someone) had said this many times. Okay, you think she’s a phony and she doesn’t “ring true”. Next. So again, why would you continue to discuss to someone you think is a phony and doesn’t ring true, why does Meghan specifically “rile up” folks for hundreds of pages? I mean some of the posters on this thread clearly hate this woman. They have called her vile names. It’s just not rational. It’s just so distasteful and trashy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I interviewed with them for a position. I went in thinking they were awful and believing everything written about them. Honestly they were just so nice. I didn’t get the job, but wish that I did. They were the complete opposite of who I expected them to be. No I will not reveal any more info or what position I applied for, I just wanted to say -whether you believe me or not- that they are actually really nice. Jeff can even tell you I previously participated in this thread maybe a year ago bashing them a couple times. I feel bad about that now.

I’m sure they are nice. Particularly Harry. And “nice” is probably part of Meghan’s brand. But it doesn’t mean she isn’t also self-righteous- I mean, who does she think she is calling senators directly about paid family leave?

This is such an odd think to say…senators work for us, we the people are their bosses. Joe public can call any senator and state their position on any legislation!

DP. I agree that Meghan Markle can call every senator if she wants to. Meghan the Duchess of Sussex is a different story. She has no business calling any senator. She may be very nice (until she throws tea at you) but she's also blinded by her self-importance.

Or maybe she realizes nasty, jealous people on the internet will obsess over her no matter what she does, so may as well use her notoriety for good? I mean, it has you talking about paid family leave. She could solve world hunger and y’all would call her the devil.

So tell me what positive effect her Duchess phone calls had.

Well it has you probably thinking about paid family leave for the first time 😀

No, tool box. Most average working mothers didn’t, in fact, need a soap opera actress who married former British royalty to tell them women should be paid leave after having a child. Get a clue. How out of touch can you be?

I know you are trying to insult me but I just feel sad for you.

DP. You went for patronizing, but belly-flopped into “I got nothing” territory.

No not trying to be patronizing at all. It’s really sad the amount of hatred you people have for someone you don’t know.

DP. This. And how they keep going on and on about her. Somebody they hate and constantly talk so much $hiittttt about. It is absolutely wild.

Not much gets people as riled up as a phony, and almost everyone can detect when a person doesn't ring true.

You (or someone) had said this many times. Okay, you think she’s a phony and she doesn’t “ring true”. Next. So again, why would you continue to discuss to someone you think is a phony and doesn’t ring true, why does Meghan specifically “rile up” folks for hundreds of pages? I mean some of the posters on this thread clearly hate this woman. They have called her vile names. It’s just not rational. It’s just so distasteful and trashy.

And keep in mind that many of the most vile comments are often deleted. Just a few pages back, there were several pages' worth of people making fun of how Archie looks. The obsession is really unhealthy.

[Anonymous]

How do we know what Archie looks like if we only see his “adorable picture” from behind? (I don’t know why they can’t release a picture of the kids but whatever, maybe it’s a PR stunt or they care about their privacy but it just looks strange)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How do we know what Archie looks like if we only see his “adorable picture” from behind? (I don’t know why they can’t release a picture of the kids but whatever, maybe it’s a PR stunt or they care about their privacy but it just looks strange)

What??? Not sharing pictures of your kid is a PR stunt? I swear, sometimes it feels like I live in a completely different moral universe as the people on DCUM.

[Anonymous]

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/meghan-markle-most-influential-royal-25596273

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/meghan-markle-most-influential-royal-25596273

Hahahaha, that’s hilarious. What exactly has she influenced other than people’s annoyance?

[Anonymous]

Oh, what's that? Meghan Markle has won her court case against the Daily Fail completely again for a SECOND TIME!?