Meghan Markle and Prince Harry News and Updates Part 3

[Anonymous]

Think strategically not emotionally. IVF plus surrogate means no titles for Harry's kids period. The Queen can at her discretion give them titles if they are found to be from surrogates but why not just let the public think everything is fine and dandy.

This information would be the equivalent of a nuclear bomb. The Crown is hinting that they know about it and are willing to let it slide unless the Sussexes pull more shenanigans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Think strategically not emotionally. IVF plus surrogate means no titles for Harry's kids period. The Queen can at her discretion give them titles if they are found to be from surrogates but why not just let the public think everything is fine and dandy.

This information would be the equivalent of a nuclear bomb. The Crown is hinting that they know about it and are willing to let it slide unless the Sussexes pull more shenanigans.

Link? Because you sound like a nut.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:why does anyone think the babies were born via surrogates and IVF? I had babies at same age. Not everyone needs to go IVF route. She also had pregnancy face on Oprah interview. You may not like her but spreading things is crazy.

Yeah, the IVF and surrogate stuff is nonsense. Some posters cannot admit what is clear to see.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:why does anyone think the babies were born via surrogates and IVF? I had babies at same age. Not everyone needs to go IVF route. She also had pregnancy face on Oprah interview. You may not like her but spreading things is crazy.

I cannot stand the Sussexes, but there’s no evidence to suggest that either of their children were born via surrogate. She looked pregnant both times and very clearly was postpartum in the photocall after Archie’s birth. MM swelled up and gained quite a bit of weight (as many do, no shame in that) while pregnant, and didn’t snap back after Archie either. That can’t really be faked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:why does anyone think the babies were born via surrogates and IVF? I had babies at same age. Not everyone needs to go IVF route. She also had pregnancy face on Oprah interview. You may not like her but spreading things is crazy.

I cannot stand the Sussexes, but there’s no evidence to suggest that either of their children were born via surrogate. She looked pregnant both times and very clearly was postpartum in the photocall after Archie’s birth. MM swelled up and gained quite a bit of weight (as many do, no shame in that) while pregnant, and didn’t snap back after Archie either. That can’t really be faked.

+1. As an official “Meghan hater,” I agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Think strategically not emotionally. IVF plus surrogate means no titles for Harry's kids period. The Queen can at her discretion give them titles if they are found to be from surrogates but why not just let the public think everything is fine and dandy.

This information would be the equivalent of a nuclear bomb. The Crown is hinting that they know about it and are willing to let it slide unless the Sussexes pull more shenanigans.

Link? Because you sound like a nut.

Right...just like they didn't lie about getting permission for Lilibet. How'd that pan out?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m pretty certain these are surrogate babies. The circumstances around their birth were fishy.

I’m no fan of Meghan but I don’t see the issue with someone having their babies via surrogate. In the case of Archie this is clearly their biological child. These rules were invented when the concept of surrogacy was different. In any event, I don’t think there was anything funny going on. They are not obliged to have a camera in the room right from the moment the kids were being conceived. There’s plenty other legitimate reasons to criticize them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m pretty certain these are surrogate babies. The circumstances around their birth were fishy.

I’m no fan of Meghan but I don’t see the issue with someone having their babies via surrogate. In the case of Archie this is clearly their biological child. These rules were invented when the concept of surrogacy was different. In any event, I don’t think there was anything funny going on. They are not obliged to have a camera in the room right from the moment the kids were being conceived. There’s plenty other legitimate reasons to criticize them.

Seriously- this IVF and surrogacy talk is just stupid. Stop it people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And there you have it: Never Explain Never Complain policy is done:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9680303/Queens-war-Harry-Meghans-LA-spin-machine.html

"The insider last night denied that, stating, ‘No video call has taken place’, adding: ‘Friends of the Sussexes appear to have given misleading briefings to journalists about what the Queen had said and that took the whole thing over the edge. The Palace couldn’t deny the story that this was a mistruth.’ Ironically, Harry has spoken out against the ‘barrage of mistruths’ on social media."

'Her Majesty has instructed courtiers to correct any statements which misrepresent her private conversations or those of other senior Royals.'

So I finally clicked on this article from the daily Mail. It says nothing new? And it’san outlet that has a long history of proving false info. I also googled and could find no other news sources corroborating. So this is gossip and can’t be taken as fact imo. I’m not even sure it’s putting forth any actual facts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m pretty certain these are surrogate babies. The circumstances around their birth were fishy.

I’m no fan of Meghan but I don’t see the issue with someone having their babies via surrogate. In the case of Archie this is clearly their biological child. These rules were invented when the concept of surrogacy was different. In any event, I don’t think there was anything funny going on. They are not obliged to have a camera in the room right from the moment the kids were being conceived. There’s plenty other legitimate reasons to criticize them.

Seriously- this IVF and surrogacy talk is just stupid. Stop it people.

I’m not Meghan fan but agree. Who cares if they used IVF? It seems quite apparent that Meghan was pregnant given how she looked looked while pregnant and after. She clearly gained weight in her face. Even in the unlikely event they did use a surrogate, I would assume Harry’s sperm was used so their kids are genetically his and have royal DNA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And there you have it: Never Explain Never Complain policy is done:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9680303/Queens-war-Harry-Meghans-LA-spin-machine.html

"The insider last night denied that, stating, ‘No video call has taken place’, adding: ‘Friends of the Sussexes appear to have given misleading briefings to journalists about what the Queen had said and that took the whole thing over the edge. The Palace couldn’t deny the story that this was a mistruth.’ Ironically, Harry has spoken out against the ‘barrage of mistruths’ on social media."

'Her Majesty has instructed courtiers to correct any statements which misrepresent her private conversations or those of other senior Royals.'

So I finally clicked on this article from the daily Mail. It says nothing new? And it’san outlet that has a long history of proving false info. I also googled and could find no other news sources corroborating. So this is gossip and can’t be taken as fact imo. I’m not even sure it’s putting forth any actual facts

You’ve touched on exactly the crux of this whole ongoing furor around Meghan and Harry: So much of it is fueled by misinformation or hearsay or straight up mistruths citing “anonymous insider sources” or “a friend of a friend of the royals” or whoever else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Looks like the Queen is standing by the BBC’s story that she wasn’t consulted on the name “Lilibet,” despite H&M’s threats to sue the BBC. Could get interesting.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/prince-harry-and-meghan-markles-war-with-the-royals-hits-fever-pitch-over-lilibet

It continues to reinforce these 2 are a hot mess together. Did anyone see the interview with Meghan's dad? Very sad, that man put her through college and seemed like a good dad. Still whatever her gripes it doesn't amount to being cut off. Actually her dad made a lot of good points.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Think strategically not emotionally. IVF plus surrogate means no titles for Harry's kids period. The Queen can at her discretion give them titles if they are found to be from surrogates but why not just let the public think everything is fine and dandy.

This information would be the equivalent of a nuclear bomb. The Crown is hinting that they know about it and are willing to let it slide unless the Sussexes pull more shenanigans.

Link? Because you sound like a nut.

Right...just like they didn't lie about getting permission for Lilibet. How'd that pan out?

Lying about a single conversation is much easier than faking a total of 18 months of pregnancy, a labor, and hiding a surrogate. Also plenty of regular women older than Meghan have kids the old fashioned way…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And there you have it: Never Explain Never Complain policy is done:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9680303/Queens-war-Harry-Meghans-LA-spin-machine.html

"The insider last night denied that, stating, ‘No video call has taken place’, adding: ‘Friends of the Sussexes appear to have given misleading briefings to journalists about what the Queen had said and that took the whole thing over the edge. The Palace couldn’t deny the story that this was a mistruth.’ Ironically, Harry has spoken out against the ‘barrage of mistruths’ on social media."

'Her Majesty has instructed courtiers to correct any statements which misrepresent her private conversations or those of other senior Royals.'

Wow. If the Queen takes her gloves off, H&M will never know what hit them.

I personally think this is a mistake. The queen is above their drama, and should still stay silent when they say stupid shit and lie. For a narcissist the worst thing is to just be ignored, and that’s what the queen should do to them.

+100

Such a stupid strategy.

[Anonymous]

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/meghan-markle-estranged-father-oprah-winfrey-weakened-prince-harry

I liked where he said you call a therapist if you're having mental issues. Isn't that what Harry did, lol. Of course she had an agenda already in place which was to leave and go back to Cali.