Meghan Markle and Prince Harry News and Updates Part 3

[Anonymous]

Now y'all are about to get hysterical over the baby's pic. No interest? Judging by the posts already forming...I'd say there's an interest. I totally support them selling (why not feed the manic frenzy) and donate the proceeds to charity. It's right up their alley. Otherwise, it's their child and they never have to show them, if they don't want. Many celebrities shield their babies, when young. This is not new territory. Post your kids, if you're so desperate for baby pics. So weird.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So who wants to place their bets now on the first photo of Lilbet being auctioned off to People magazine? Like Brad and Angelina Joile minus the donating of the proceeds to charity. If the Jolie-Pitts got 14 million how much do you think the Markles will rake in?

Even better they might donate to the new foundation they set up for her or use the existing Archewell Foundation. So, basically paying themselves.

I'm thinking they should donate to Liars Anonymous.

[Anonymous]

How many people actually want a pic as opposed to witnessing predictions come true.
Don’t care about what baby looks like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How many people actually want a pic as opposed to witnessing predictions come true.
Don’t care about what baby looks like.

Don't care about the baby. Royal intrigue has always been interesting. It's only the ignorant who think nobody ever discussed the royals before Meghan came along.

[Anonymous]

I don't think we will get a full on view of the baby. They haven't intentionally shown Archie's face since they've been in the states.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many people actually want a pic as opposed to witnessing predictions come true.
Don’t care about what baby looks like.

Don't care about the baby. Royal intrigue has always been interesting. It's only the ignorant who think nobody ever discussed the royals before Meghan came along.

Acccording to the haters, they ain't Royal so...what gives on the continued interest?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone think they should have gone with Barbara Walters?

Probably not from their stand point. Barbara is a real journalist and may have asked some tough questions. Oprah just sat there, and if I recall it had long been taped. Therefore she could have checked out all the lies Meghan told, but didn't. For example when she claimed her sister only started using that name after she was dating Harry. Then Samantha showed her degree with Markle on it, lol. And Meghan at her graduation. Hard to say what Barbara would do, but Oprah is going to go along with the political agenda. Not to mention they are all neighbors now.

Is Barbara Walters still alive? She must be pretty old at this point. Younger people would not recognize the name I think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many people actually want a pic as opposed to witnessing predictions come true.
Don’t care about what baby looks like.

Don't care about the baby. Royal intrigue has always been interesting. It's only the ignorant who think nobody ever discussed the royals before Meghan came along.

Acccording to the haters, they ain't Royal so...what gives on the continued interest?

They aren’t royal? The “Duchess of Sussex” might beg to differ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anyone think they should have gone with Barbara Walters?

How many young people even know who Barbara Walters is today?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone think they should have gone with Barbara Walters?

How many young people even know who Barbara Walters is today?

Doesn’t Barbara Walters have dementia?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many people actually want a pic as opposed to witnessing predictions come true.
Don’t care about what baby looks like.

Don't care about the baby. Royal intrigue has always been interesting. It's only the ignorant who think nobody ever discussed the royals before Meghan came along.

Acccording to the haters, they ain't Royal so...what gives on the continued interest?

Harry is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many people actually want a pic as opposed to witnessing predictions come true.
Don’t care about what baby looks like.

Don't care about the baby. Royal intrigue has always been interesting. It's only the ignorant who think nobody ever discussed the royals before Meghan came along.

Acccording to the haters, they ain't Royal so...what gives on the continued interest?

They aren’t royal? The “Duchess of Sussex” might beg to differ.

It's a combo of royal intrigue and celebrities. Like royal kardashians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone think they should have gone with Barbara Walters?

How many young people even know who Barbara Walters is today?

Not enough. "Journalists" like Omid are toadies for the celebrities that he covers.

[Anonymous]

https://www.refinery29.com/en-gb/2021/06/10518195/megxit-meghan-markle-anti-fandom?utm_source=t.co&utm_medium=uktweet

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.refinery29.com/en-gb/2021/06/10518195/megxit-meghan-markle-anti-fandom?utm_source=t.co&utm_medium=uktweet

Glad this got posted. I’ve wondered how threads like this got so noxious. I’ve also wondered about commonalities between the sort of non- thinking associated with Fox News in the US, and the bizarre conspiracy theories and truly odd insistence on picking a “team” centered around Meghan. This article aptly connected the dots.