Meghan and Prince Harry are moving to the U.S./Canada - OFFICIAL

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hear Sunshine Sachs is no longer representing Harry and Meghan. Wonder what that means? This will be their 5th PR change in 2 years. Not a good look when their PR is still consistently a disaster, but I’m sure it’s just because the British media has it out for them LOL!

MM burning another bridge. Seems she’s burned every bridge in her life over 40 years. Someone should tell her to look in the mirror.

I just don't see how the MM sycophants can discount the fact that numerous professional AMERICAN PR firms keep dropping this couple. How can that possibly be tied in to some conspiracy with the British media? It's clearly a result of their personal actions. Tthese are well-regarded, successful PR firms that seem to be able to manage relationships with several other high-profile stars yet for some reason Harry and MM seem to be completely unmanageable. What say you MM stans?

I think the American PR firms look at the absolute insanity and shameless racism of the British tabloids and want no part of it. At least here in the US, journalists listen when you point out they are using a racial double standard. The British rags say “So what?”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Piers will do and say anything to remain relevant.

True.

[Anonymous]

Hello Time Magazine - lovely to see you today

https://time.com/5765329/meghan-markle-womens-shelter-vancouver-visit/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So there are no women’s shelters in the U.K.?

Plenty. What there isn't in Canada - a hateful U.K. media and palace courtiers insisting Meghan stop 'doing so much' because Kate can't keep up.

I'm not sure how impressed Canadians are with royalty compared to Brits. She's just the same as any other wealthy person, in Canada. Right now she's interesting but soon enough the excitement will fade and she'll be just another rich American temporarily living in Canada.

I swear I remember reading this word for word just before the wedding - though I believe the phrase was 'they're newlyweds and soon the focus will be back on the others'.

Meanwhile Meghan gained 10 million Instagram followers in 6 months - is about to hit 11.8 million today and umm...is the most photographed woman in the world alongside the still most popular member of the royal family - her husband.

And Archie...the world goes crazy when they see him. I can't imagine what will happen when he can actually walk.

Um. I'd need to see credible sources that she's the most photographed woman in the world (really? My, fancy that. More photographed than, say, Michelle Obama, or the Queen herself). OR that her husband is the most popular member of the royal family? Meghan hasn't made much splash in the US celebrity press, no more than a bunch of other hollywood stars and starlets.

There was a link to a poll early on in this thread showing Harry's popularity well below that of the Queen and his brother.

I think you're just convinced in your little world that Harry and Meghan are this amazing couple and everyone is out to get them.

Every poll from various organizations for years has consistently shown Harry as the most popular member of the royal family, followed by the queen and the rest of the family. This has been consistent over time and all sorts of polling methodologies.

You found ONE poll by one of the news organizations that Harry is suing that shows he’s no longer the most popular royal. ONE poll - and consider the source..

You’re REALLY reaching.

Uh... show me the polls.

And you know, polls do change. Someone is popular one year, not so popular next year.

I know you're feeling hurt that somehow the magic of Meghan and Harry isn't turning out what you envisioned it when you fell in love with the couple's fairy tale story and that their future is going to be b-list celebs without much of a purpose and maybe even hawking cheap makeup.

You’re putting a lot of weight in one poll...

It has nothing to do with wishful thinking, it has to do with understanding basic math and statistics.

But you still aren't showing us anything, are you? Because you really can't, can you?

Poll by the most quoted market research source in the UK and a site that is used by all the credible UK media.





https://yougov.co.uk/ratings/politics/popularity/royalty/all

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/11/12/duke-sussex-pips-queen-take-popular-royal-crown-according-survey/

https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/04/17/meghan-markle-prince-harry-baby-popularity-poll

- DP

Go take a nap PP and also - bring up that information on Meghan's PR firm when you find it.

Racism is the only logical explanation for Meghan's low score on all of these polls.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prince Andrew must be so happy right now. Not a single blip of him being a child-rapist. Is there any possibility that this is partially orchestrated to for that purpose?

There was barely a blip about Andrew and the alleged pedophilia prior to this as well from the Rota media, at least. They're hiding it, likely at the request of the BRF, and probably have been for years. The British media has barely covered Andrew's disgusting behavior -- most of the solid reporting on him has been from US media. It's only now that they can't keep ignoring it because of US coverage that it's getting any traction in the UK.

That's mostly an example of how awful the BRF is, and I do think it's possible the courtiers linked the H&M plan early to distract from Andrew, but I doubt H&M had anything to do with it.

Selective memory? It was covered pretty thoroughly last year before the Harry + Meghan thing broke out. All that press around Andrew being effectively fired from royal duties by his mother. All the furor over the interview he gave and how it effectively destroyed him and his future. And people are still talking about it - as this thread shows.

I suspect the real reason it hasn't gained much traction is because aspects of the case are still up in the air and speculation and there's legal ramifications surrounding it and people are waiting to see what happens next. The girl in question was also 17, not 7, which is what most people think of when they hear the word pedophile. Still under age but not quite in the same way. So the perception is that he's a fat lewd old guy going after a nubile teen, which is not the same as someone going after a child.

And yet, he's not being harassed daily by the "Rota" and absurd articles in the Daily Fail ... hmm wonder why that is ...

probably because hes been MIA... if he was out and about there would be things to talk about but what are the tablois supposed to do, just rehash the same Epstein story? if MM and Harry had just done their work and not done that ridiculous whiny interview last year they would be in a much better place with the tabloids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This latest stunt just looks desperate and slightly unhinged. She wanted privacy, ok, so take it. Don’t stage a transparent attempt to play the princess in Canada.

As someone who was in an abusive marriage, it was a meaningful gesture. Be glad you have never needed a shelter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is there any credence to the reports saying that the final straw for Harry was the photo of the Queen with Charles, William and George? It’s not like they included Camilla and the rest of the Cambridges and just left the Sussexes out.

That would be ridiculous. There have been photo shoots of the Queen and her 3 direct heirs of succession before. I think that it's a quite lovely idea.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prince Andrew must be so happy right now. Not a single blip of him being a child-rapist. Is there any possibility that this is partially orchestrated to for that purpose?

There was barely a blip about Andrew and the alleged pedophilia prior to this as well from the Rota media, at least. They're hiding it, likely at the request of the BRF, and probably have been for years. The British media has barely covered Andrew's disgusting behavior -- most of the solid reporting on him has been from US media. It's only now that they can't keep ignoring it because of US coverage that it's getting any traction in the UK.

That's mostly an example of how awful the BRF is, and I do think it's possible the courtiers linked the H&M plan early to distract from Andrew, but I doubt H&M had anything to do with it.

Selective memory? It was covered pretty thoroughly last year before the Harry + Meghan thing broke out. All that press around Andrew being effectively fired from royal duties by his mother. All the furor over the interview he gave and how it effectively destroyed him and his future. And people are still talking about it - as this thread shows.

I suspect the real reason it hasn't gained much traction is because aspects of the case are still up in the air and speculation and there's legal ramifications surrounding it and people are waiting to see what happens next. The girl in question was also 17, not 7, which is what most people think of when they hear the word pedophile. Still under age but not quite in the same way. So the perception is that he's a fat lewd old guy going after a nubile teen, which is not the same as someone going after a child.

You know, when you are resorting to defending Andrew on the basis of his victim being a "nubile teen," you've already lost.

Also, your theory is wrong because the story has gained enormous PR traction in the US. The UK media only covered it because they had no choice. They certainly weren't the leaders around the issue you would expect, likely because of the BRF.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is there any credence to the reports saying that the final straw for Harry was the photo of the Queen with Charles, William and George? It’s not like they included Camilla and the rest of the Cambridges and just left the Sussexes out.

I think it was the featured photos on her desk during the Christmas message. There was a very large picture of Will, Kate and Kids, one of Charles and Camilla, one of her father but none of the Sussexes or Archie. They made the cut the prior year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there any credence to the reports saying that the final straw for Harry was the photo of the Queen with Charles, William and George? It’s not like they included Camilla and the rest of the Cambridges and just left the Sussexes out.

I think it was the featured photos on her desk during the Christmas message. There was a very large picture of Will, Kate and Kids, one of Charles and Camilla, one of her father but none of the Sussexes or Archie. They made the cut the prior year.

I thought it was odd that they did that when H&M's pictures were there the prior year. I think the BRF are aware about what H&M's plans are and they are trying to break it into the public gently through these pictures, but then the leak got out and the only way to salvage it it for H&M to own it, and for the queen to address it sooner than she would have preferred.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prince Andrew must be so happy right now. Not a single blip of him being a child-rapist. Is there any possibility that this is partially orchestrated to for that purpose?

There was barely a blip about Andrew and the alleged pedophilia prior to this as well from the Rota media, at least. They're hiding it, likely at the request of the BRF, and probably have been for years. The British media has barely covered Andrew's disgusting behavior -- most of the solid reporting on him has been from US media. It's only now that they can't keep ignoring it because of US coverage that it's getting any traction in the UK.

That's mostly an example of how awful the BRF is, and I do think it's possible the courtiers linked the H&M plan early to distract from Andrew, but I doubt H&M had anything to do with it.

Selective memory? It was covered pretty thoroughly last year before the Harry + Meghan thing broke out. All that press around Andrew being effectively fired from royal duties by his mother. All the furor over the interview he gave and how it effectively destroyed him and his future. And people are still talking about it - as this thread shows.

I suspect the real reason it hasn't gained much traction is because aspects of the case are still up in the air and speculation and there's legal ramifications surrounding it and people are waiting to see what happens next. The girl in question was also 17, not 7, which is what most people think of when they hear the word pedophile. Still under age but not quite in the same way. So the perception is that he's a fat lewd old guy going after a nubile teen, which is not the same as someone going after a child.

You know, when you are resorting to defending Andrew on the basis of his victim being a "nubile teen," you've already lost.

Also, your theory is wrong because the story has gained enormous PR traction in the US. The UK media only covered it because they had no choice. They certainly weren't the leaders around the issue you would expect, likely because of the BRF.

DP. Lost what? Andrew has been fired. There's not much more to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is there any credence to the reports saying that the final straw for Harry was the photo of the Queen with Charles, William and George? It’s not like they included Camilla and the rest of the Cambridges and just left the Sussexes out.

No, it sounds like all of this was in the works longer than that, no?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prince Andrew must be so happy right now. Not a single blip of him being a child-rapist. Is there any possibility that this is partially orchestrated to for that purpose?

There was barely a blip about Andrew and the alleged pedophilia prior to this as well from the Rota media, at least. They're hiding it, likely at the request of the BRF, and probably have been for years. The British media has barely covered Andrew's disgusting behavior -- most of the solid reporting on him has been from US media. It's only now that they can't keep ignoring it because of US coverage that it's getting any traction in the UK.

That's mostly an example of how awful the BRF is, and I do think it's possible the courtiers linked the H&M plan early to distract from Andrew, but I doubt H&M had anything to do with it.

Selective memory? It was covered pretty thoroughly last year before the Harry + Meghan thing broke out. All that press around Andrew being effectively fired from royal duties by his mother. All the furor over the interview he gave and how it effectively destroyed him and his future. And people are still talking about it - as this thread shows.

I suspect the real reason it hasn't gained much traction is because aspects of the case are still up in the air and speculation and there's legal ramifications surrounding it and people are waiting to see what happens next. The girl in question was also 17, not 7, which is what most people think of when they hear the word pedophile. Still under age but not quite in the same way. So the perception is that he's a fat lewd old guy going after a nubile teen, which is not the same as someone going after a child.

And yet, he's not being harassed daily by the "Rota" and absurd articles in the Daily Fail ... hmm wonder why that is ...

probably because hes been MIA... if he was out and about there would be things to talk about but what are the tablois supposed to do, just rehash the same Epstein story? if MM and Harry had just done their work and not done that ridiculous whiny interview last year they would be in a much better place with the tabloids.

And he's not young and photogenic. A pretty picture still generates clicks, no matter the accompanying headline.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there any credence to the reports saying that the final straw for Harry was the photo of the Queen with Charles, William and George? It’s not like they included Camilla and the rest of the Cambridges and just left the Sussexes out.

I think it was the featured photos on her desk during the Christmas message. There was a very large picture of Will, Kate and Kids, one of Charles and Camilla, one of her father but none of the Sussexes or Archie. They made the cut the prior year.

I doubt this had anything to do with it. If they were this sensitive to what HM thinks of them, they wouldn’t be leaving.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prince Andrew must be so happy right now. Not a single blip of him being a child-rapist. Is there any possibility that this is partially orchestrated to for that purpose?

You think Meghan cares for Andrew?

No not at all. I just wonder if the BRF decided that they could benefit from the situation.

She has demonstrated that taking one for the team is not her thing. So I’m going to say no.

I’m not suggesting that she agreed to be pawn. I’m suggesting that BRF is using the tumultuous relationship to their advantage making it a much bigger deal then it needs to be.