Meghan Markle and Prince Harry News and Updates Part 3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Diana had style and charisma. I think Kate and Meghan have more natural beauty than her though.

I agree with this. Diana had the IT factor, which not many people have. And she was naturally photogenic. But Kate and Meghan are both far prettier than her.

She was also a product of her times- in today's social media world, would she have been as beloved? Who knows?

Bingo. Diana had a ton of charisma and the IT factor. It's hard to describe, but you sure know when you see it. Even today when looking at pictures of Diana, she just stands out from everyone else in the picture. Her charisma still comes through.

Kate is definitely naturally prettier than Diana but she doesn't have the charisma/IT factor. She can blend in. Diana never could blend in. Meaghan is also naturally prettier, has the charisma (more charisma than Kate but not nearly at the same level as Diana).

[Anonymous]

H&M rejected the Earl of Dumbarton title for Archie because they were worried he’d be teased?? Lololol.

https://pagesix.com/2021/06/24/harry-and-meghan-feared-archie-would-be-bullied-with-title/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The claims made by the times article were vetted and very credible. It sounds like there are multiple people who Meghan picked on and bullied- not just one. The Times is not a tabloid and this article would never have been published if they weren’t 100% able to back it up.

Meghan is a bully and a narcissist. Terrible person who is fake fake fake and is charming enough so that people buy her fake ness.

So, what EXACTLY were those claims that you find so credible? Reports of specific behavior? Let’s hear it. Otherwise all that’s out so far is vague allegations from unnamed sources. You seem very vehement about things you couldn’t possibly know, and very vague for all of your histrionic repetitions.

No histrionics here my friend. The details in the articl are scant/ merely that there is documented evidence that at least two of her aides quit because they felt humiliated and bullied. The aides themselves are unnamed in the article but there is a limited pool of possibilities so they aren’t exactly anonymous. The claims were vetted and specific emails, including dates are referenced in the article.

DP. This is the issue with all of the palace sussex battles. This makes the BRF look bad as well. Either she was a bully and they waited YEARS to do anything or she’s not and this is a smear campaign. There were so many people that outranked Meghan that could have defended those people she allegedly bullied and did not at the time when it mattered.

DP. No the BRF didn’t wait “YEARS” to do anything. Maybe it took a while for complaints about MM to bubble up and maybe their first instinct was to protect MM (since she was family). But in any case she was only a working royal for - what? - like a year and a half? Unless a boss’ alleged conduct is truly egregious, these kinds of complaints from employees generally take a while to work through the system (they have to be investigated, etc.).

How was it not years? They didn’t start the independent investigation of the allegations until this year, which has been widely reported. Did they do something before then other than allegedly William maybe talking to Harry? Also it doesn’t matter that they wanted to protect her because she’s family as she wasn’t the one who needed protecting. Have you ever had a job before? That type of response is not acceptable and would result in the employer getting sued.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This comment on GOMI is perfect:

mama meowed:

It just makes me laugh that Meghan rolled up into the palace with these diva boss babe demands and an exacting “work ethic” that no one could keep up with like she was some super A lister or high powered former CEO or executive. Like, lady where do you get off. You were a former ensemble player on a cable show. Please spare me the sob story of how no staff could keep up with your professional demands. It sounds like she was being a huge brat and was drunk on her newly found power and status. That’s MUCH different than being a demanding boss although she wouldn’t know that because she never was a boss or had subordinates before in her C lister life!

Getting a position on a regularly airing show is likely more than the whole British family (save possibly Philip) could do if they had to make things happen themselves. I don’t think a single one of them that isn’t a married-in graduated with honors of any kind which is the one opportunity they have to show their stuff without their name (sorta).

It is what it is. It's not like Meghan could make a Netflix or a book deal happen by herself either.

Let's say it again: the Sussex problem is that their connection to the royal family is the most interesting thing about them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This comment on GOMI is perfect:

mama meowed:

It just makes me laugh that Meghan rolled up into the palace with these diva boss babe demands and an exacting “work ethic” that no one could keep up with like she was some super A lister or high powered former CEO or executive. Like, lady where do you get off. You were a former ensemble player on a cable show. Please spare me the sob story of how no staff could keep up with your professional demands. It sounds like she was being a huge brat and was drunk on her newly found power and status. That’s MUCH different than being a demanding boss although she wouldn’t know that because she never was a boss or had subordinates before in her C lister life!

Getting a position on a regularly airing show is likely more than the whole British family (save possibly Philip) could do if they had to make things happen themselves. I don’t think a single one of them that isn’t a married-in graduated with honors of any kind which is the one opportunity they have to show their stuff without their name (sorta).

Do olympic athletes count?

In a sport where only the Uber wealthy have access to the best horses, boarding, and long list of working class mopes to care for the animals? No.

Sure, sure. But you don’t make the rules.

I don’t but only the most delusional would say that equestrianism (?) is a sport that is accessible to anyone but 1%. And my point was that they haven’t accomplished anything without the position and wealth of their family.

I guess you must be really impressed with Meghan getting a gig flashing a suitcase on Deal or No Deal. I'm sure she totally got that due to her superior acting skills and no other reason.

Do you have some reason to believe that suitcase girls are nepotism hires? I’m not impressed by any of them. But I don’t think any of the BRF could even get something as unimpressive as that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:H&M rejected the Earl of Dumbarton title for Archie because they were worried he’d be teased?? Lololol.

https://pagesix.com/2021/06/24/harry-and-meghan-feared-archie-would-be-bullied-with-title/

They should be more concerned on the optics of turning it down and insulting the people for whom the title represents.
What a couple of twits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This comment on GOMI is perfect:

mama meowed:

It just makes me laugh that Meghan rolled up into the palace with these diva boss babe demands and an exacting “work ethic” that no one could keep up with like she was some super A lister or high powered former CEO or executive. Like, lady where do you get off. You were a former ensemble player on a cable show. Please spare me the sob story of how no staff could keep up with your professional demands. It sounds like she was being a huge brat and was drunk on her newly found power and status. That’s MUCH different than being a demanding boss although she wouldn’t know that because she never was a boss or had subordinates before in her C lister life!

Getting a position on a regularly airing show is likely more than the whole British family (save possibly Philip) could do if they had to make things happen themselves. I don’t think a single one of them that isn’t a married-in graduated with honors of any kind which is the one opportunity they have to show their stuff without their name (sorta).

It is what it is. It's not like Meghan could make a Netflix or a book deal happen by herself either.

Let's say it again: the Sussex problem is that their connection to the royal family is the most interesting thing about them.

But that’s true of literally every single member of the royal family lol. Prince Charles and Camilla are only interesting because of their connection to Queen Elizabeth. The Cambridges are only interesting because of their connection to the royal family. Queen Elizabeth is only interesting because of her connection to her father and because her uncle married some psycho. Etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This comment on GOMI is perfect:

mama meowed:

It just makes me laugh that Meghan rolled up into the palace with these diva boss babe demands and an exacting “work ethic” that no one could keep up with like she was some super A lister or high powered former CEO or executive. Like, lady where do you get off. You were a former ensemble player on a cable show. Please spare me the sob story of how no staff could keep up with your professional demands. It sounds like she was being a huge brat and was drunk on her newly found power and status. That’s MUCH different than being a demanding boss although she wouldn’t know that because she never was a boss or had subordinates before in her C lister life!

Getting a position on a regularly airing show is likely more than the whole British family (save possibly Philip) could do if they had to make things happen themselves. I don’t think a single one of them that isn’t a married-in graduated with honors of any kind which is the one opportunity they have to show their stuff without their name (sorta).

It is what it is. It's not like Meghan could make a Netflix or a book deal happen by herself either.

Let's say it again: the Sussex problem is that their connection to the royal family is the most interesting thing about them.

I don't think that is THEIR problem, they seem to know that and be leveraging it. It seems to be that that is the problem YOU and people like you have with them. That they have been able to leverage the connection to establish fame and security for themselves while extracting themselves from the situation.

Sorry they didn't pull a Britney and just accept abusive indentured servitude indefinitely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This comment on GOMI is perfect:

mama meowed:

It just makes me laugh that Meghan rolled up into the palace with these diva boss babe demands and an exacting “work ethic” that no one could keep up with like she was some super A lister or high powered former CEO or executive. Like, lady where do you get off. You were a former ensemble player on a cable show. Please spare me the sob story of how no staff could keep up with your professional demands. It sounds like she was being a huge brat and was drunk on her newly found power and status. That’s MUCH different than being a demanding boss although she wouldn’t know that because she never was a boss or had subordinates before in her C lister life!

Getting a position on a regularly airing show is likely more than the whole British family (save possibly Philip) could do if they had to make things happen themselves. I don’t think a single one of them that isn’t a married-in graduated with honors of any kind which is the one opportunity they have to show their stuff without their name (sorta).

Do olympic athletes count?

In a sport where only the Uber wealthy have access to the best horses, boarding, and long list of working class mopes to care for the animals? No.

Sure, sure. But you don’t make the rules.

I don’t but only the most delusional would say that equestrianism (?) is a sport that is accessible to anyone but 1%. And my point was that they haven’t accomplished anything without the position and wealth of their family.

I guess you must be really impressed with Meghan getting a gig flashing a suitcase on Deal or No Deal. I'm sure she totally got that due to her superior acting skills and no other reason.

Do you have some reason to believe that suitcase girls are nepotism hires? I’m not impressed by any of them. But I don’t think any of the BRF could even get something as unimpressive as that.

Please. Meghan was pumping her connections just as much as anyone else does to get ahead. Her husband (Trevor) and dad helped however they could. Meghan is no more special or talented. It's all about who you know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The claims made by the times article were vetted and very credible. It sounds like there are multiple people who Meghan picked on and bullied- not just one. The Times is not a tabloid and this article would never have been published if they weren’t 100% able to back it up.

Meghan is a bully and a narcissist. Terrible person who is fake fake fake and is charming enough so that people buy her fake ness.

So, what EXACTLY were those claims that you find so credible? Reports of specific behavior? Let’s hear it. Otherwise all that’s out so far is vague allegations from unnamed sources. You seem very vehement about things you couldn’t possibly know, and very vague for all of your histrionic repetitions.

No histrionics here my friend. The details in the articl are scant/ merely that there is documented evidence that at least two of her aides quit because they felt humiliated and bullied. The aides themselves are unnamed in the article but there is a limited pool of possibilities so they aren’t exactly anonymous. The claims were vetted and specific emails, including dates are referenced in the article.

DP. This is the issue with all of the palace sussex battles. This makes the BRF look bad as well. Either she was a bully and they waited YEARS to do anything or she’s not and this is a smear campaign. There were so many people that outranked Meghan that could have defended those people she allegedly bullied and did not at the time when it mattered.

DP. No the BRF didn’t wait “YEARS” to do anything. Maybe it took a while for complaints about MM to bubble up and maybe their first instinct was to protect MM (since she was family). But in any case she was only a working royal for - what? - like a year and a half? Unless a boss’ alleged conduct is truly egregious, these kinds of complaints from employees generally take a while to work through the system (they have to be investigated, etc.).

Isn't this the reason why they hired an outside law firm to investigate the claims? It casts a bad light on both Meghan and Harry for the allegations and on the BRF/grey men who protected the family over protecting the staff. No one looks good here.

I agree with you, and that’s what makes it unconscionable. The timing of the “allegations “ did, indeed cast a bad light on Meghan and Harry — as it seems it was intended to do. If interest in the investigation sputters out, or if nothing is reported, there will forever be a hazy sense that Meghan did something mean and bullying — without anyone having to provide either specific details of what she actually supposedly did, or any specific resolution. So hazy allegations smearing Meghan’s behavior, character, and fitness are actually noxiously bullying in and of themselves — as long as they remain unsubstantiated. Pretty twisted stuff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Diana had style and charisma. I think Kate and Meghan have more natural beauty than her though.

I agree with this. Diana had the IT factor, which not many people have. And she was naturally photogenic. But Kate and Meghan are both far prettier than her.

She was also a product of her times- in today's social media world, would she have been as beloved? Who knows?

Bingo. Diana had a ton of charisma and the IT factor. It's hard to describe, but you sure know when you see it. Even today when looking at pictures of Diana, she just stands out from everyone else in the picture. Her charisma still comes through.

Kate is definitely naturally prettier than Diana but she doesn't have the charisma/IT factor. She can blend in. Diana never could blend in. Meaghan is also naturally prettier, has the charisma (more charisma than Kate but not nearly at the same level as Diana).

I never thought Diana had charisma. She always tripped my button labeled "crazy person, should be avoided." And Diana had significant emotional problems, so I wasn't wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Diana had style and charisma. I think Kate and Meghan have more natural beauty than her though.

I agree with this. Diana had the IT factor, which not many people have. And she was naturally photogenic. But Kate and Meghan are both far prettier than her.

She was also a product of her times- in today's social media world, would she have been as beloved? Who knows?

Bingo. Diana had a ton of charisma and the IT factor. It's hard to describe, but you sure know when you see it. Even today when looking at pictures of Diana, she just stands out from everyone else in the picture. Her charisma still comes through.

Kate is definitely naturally prettier than Diana but she doesn't have the charisma/IT factor. She can blend in. Diana never could blend in. Meghan is also naturally prettier, has the charisma (more charisma than Kate but not nearly at the same level as Diana).

Diana was much prettier than any of them. Kate however has the personalty (or appears to). In real life that wins especially since she is also cute. If you have seen close ups of Meghan she has really bad skin. I'm thinking she has a lot of sun damage from year ago, but she is not ageing well. At least Diana knew her role in regards to public events and obligations. Same with Kate. Meghan proved to be the selfish person she is and bailed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This comment on GOMI is perfect:

mama meowed:

It just makes me laugh that Meghan rolled up into the palace with these diva boss babe demands and an exacting “work ethic” that no one could keep up with like she was some super A lister or high powered former CEO or executive. Like, lady where do you get off. You were a former ensemble player on a cable show. Please spare me the sob story of how no staff could keep up with your professional demands. It sounds like she was being a huge brat and was drunk on her newly found power and status. That’s MUCH different than being a demanding boss although she wouldn’t know that because she never was a boss or had subordinates before in her C lister life!

Getting a position on a regularly airing show is likely more than the whole British family (save possibly Philip) could do if they had to make things happen themselves. I don’t think a single one of them that isn’t a married-in graduated with honors of any kind which is the one opportunity they have to show their stuff without their name (sorta).

It is what it is. It's not like Meghan could make a Netflix or a book deal happen by herself either.

Let's say it again: the Sussex problem is that their connection to the royal family is the most interesting thing about them.

Harry is an interesting guy, on his own. He was in the military and did good service in a war zone. He works for veterans causes. He has overcome the tragic death of his mother. He's had a party boy past and made some mistakes. I'd be happy to have a beer with him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This comment on GOMI is perfect:

mama meowed:

It just makes me laugh that Meghan rolled up into the palace with these diva boss babe demands and an exacting “work ethic” that no one could keep up with like she was some super A lister or high powered former CEO or executive. Like, lady where do you get off. You were a former ensemble player on a cable show. Please spare me the sob story of how no staff could keep up with your professional demands. It sounds like she was being a huge brat and was drunk on her newly found power and status. That’s MUCH different than being a demanding boss although she wouldn’t know that because she never was a boss or had subordinates before in her C lister life!

Getting a position on a regularly airing show is likely more than the whole British family (save possibly Philip) could do if they had to make things happen themselves. I don’t think a single one of them that isn’t a married-in graduated with honors of any kind which is the one opportunity they have to show their stuff without their name (sorta).

It is what it is. It's not like Meghan could make a Netflix or a book deal happen by herself either.

Let's say it again: the Sussex problem is that their connection to the royal family is the most interesting thing about them.

Harry is an interesting guy, on his own. He was in the military and did good service in a war zone. He works for veterans causes. He has overcome the tragic death of his mother. He's had a party boy past and made some mistakes. I'd be happy to have a beer with him.

Those are the least interesting things about him. If randos meet him I'll bet the first thing they want to ask about is the Queen. Or what's it like to live in a castle. Those are the things that are interesting. Military service? Reformed party boy? Death of a parent? Boring. Those guys are a dime a dozen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This comment on GOMI is perfect:

mama meowed:

It just makes me laugh that Meghan rolled up into the palace with these diva boss babe demands and an exacting “work ethic” that no one could keep up with like she was some super A lister or high powered former CEO or executive. Like, lady where do you get off. You were a former ensemble player on a cable show. Please spare me the sob story of how no staff could keep up with your professional demands. It sounds like she was being a huge brat and was drunk on her newly found power and status. That’s MUCH different than being a demanding boss although she wouldn’t know that because she never was a boss or had subordinates before in her C lister life!

Getting a position on a regularly airing show is likely more than the whole British family (save possibly Philip) could do if they had to make things happen themselves. I don’t think a single one of them that isn’t a married-in graduated with honors of any kind which is the one opportunity they have to show their stuff without their name (sorta).

Do olympic athletes count?

In a sport where only the Uber wealthy have access to the best horses, boarding, and long list of working class mopes to care for the animals? No.

Sure, sure. But you don’t make the rules.

I don’t but only the most delusional would say that equestrianism (?) is a sport that is accessible to anyone but 1%. And my point was that they haven’t accomplished anything without the position and wealth of their family.

I guess you must be really impressed with Meghan getting a gig flashing a suitcase on Deal or No Deal. I'm sure she totally got that due to her superior acting skills and no other reason.

Do you have some reason to believe that suitcase girls are nepotism hires? I’m not impressed by any of them. But I don’t think any of the BRF could even get something as unimpressive as that.

Why would they want that?