Meghan Markle and Prince Harry News and Updates Part 3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All hail the Queen Grandmother. Who immediately drove over to see her beloved grandson as soon as his flight from L.A. landed.

F PWT.


But 30 minutes after arriving in Windsor - and before he even had time to unpack - the Queen, 95, was pictured driving towards his home.

Very sweet. I always heard the Queen and Harry were especially close.

Lol, yeah the Queen is not wasting her time with him.

Harry has to quarantine for 5 days first.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9723825/Harry-chauffeured-LAX-fly-London-unveiling-statue-mother-Diana.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To be clear Lilibet is 21 days old. What responsible parent would get on an airplane to a foreign country with a newborn baby even preCovid? If this thread is any indication of the idiocy Megan and Harry have to deal with, than I definitely feel for them. I would not have the patience for such foolishness, it’s one thing to attack H&M but all bets are off when innocent babies are involved.

+1

I was told not to bring my baby near a crowd of people until she had her first shots. no way would i take a 21 day old baby on a plane.

You know they aren't going to fly commercial, right? There wouldn't be a crowd.

Get a grip. Even on a private plane there is a pilot and staff in a relatively small space. Aside from that no one 21 days after giving birth wants to deal with an infant crying because their ears popped on a flight of that length. LAX to London is almost 12 hours. There’s a lot to criticize them for but this is just cuckoo.

Have you ever flown on a Gulfstream? They are plenty comfortable. While I would never fly commercial with a newborn, I wouldn’t hesitate to fly private. The two pilots can pretty much stay in their cabin and you don’t need any additional staff unless you want it. Between nannies (I bet they have at least two), housekeepers (again, at least two), security and other staff, Lillibet is likely exposed to more people inside her house every day than she would be on a private aircraft. And let’s not forget, Meghan wouldn’t be the one packing the baby’s gear- there is help to do that. My bet is that we’ll never see Meghan step foot in the UK again, and she certainly won’t allow Harry to take the kids without her.

Meghan and Harry got into trouble for flying private before. Being pro-environment and pro-equity, the optics aren't great. I think they would fly commercial, and that's a crazy thing to do with a baby less than one month old.

[Anonymous]

Is the Queen driving herself in that photo? It looks like it!

[Anonymous]

Do you have to quarantine if you are vaccinated?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So how much for Harry and how much for Will?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/harry-charles-finances-royal-palace/2021/06/24/675411b0-d4ca-11eb-b39f-05a2d776b1f4_story.html

Prince Charles continued to financially support the Duke and Duchess of Sussex after they stepped down as senior members of the British royal family, according to financial accounts released Thursday.

Prince Charles’s office, Clarence House, published in its annual accounts that Charles paid his sons, Prince William and Prince Harry, and their families, a sum of $6.3 million. The annual report covers the period from April 1, 2020, to March 31, 2021. It’s not broken down by family.

Harry previously had told Oprah Winfrey that his family "literally cut me off financially" in the first quarter of 2020. He said he had to use money left to him by his mother, Princess Diana, to help pay for security for his family.

A spokesman for Clarence House told the BBC that “the Prince of Wales allocated a substantial sum” to Harry and Meghan, the duke and duchess, last year “to support them” with their transition in stepping down as senior members of the British royal family and relocating to California.

Is anyone surprised that Harry’s version of “cut off” means only getting millions of pounds? And when he said he was cut off in the “first quarter,” he really meant summer?

Isn't the fiscal year for the UK different, like the federal government here? Their first quarter ends in the summer. So that would mean Harry was telling the truth.

I love how PP read what Harry said and tried to make it look like she came up with it on her own, LOL

Yes, honey, we all read that, too. And Harry was on American TV for an American audience, he should know better.

“First Quarter” means Jan.-March in common usage in the UK, as well. They didn’t say “fiscal year,” and despite their “akshually it wasn’t technically incorrect” explanation now, the fact remains that they were spinning the facts to make Charles look as bad as they possibly could, and left a misleading impression, i.e., that they were “cut off” (given no money) earlier in the year. In fact, they were given millions into the summer. We should look at everything else they said in the same light.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So how much for Harry and how much for Will?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/harry-charles-finances-royal-palace/2021/06/24/675411b0-d4ca-11eb-b39f-05a2d776b1f4_story.html

Prince Charles continued to financially support the Duke and Duchess of Sussex after they stepped down as senior members of the British royal family, according to financial accounts released Thursday.

Prince Charles’s office, Clarence House, published in its annual accounts that Charles paid his sons, Prince William and Prince Harry, and their families, a sum of $6.3 million. The annual report covers the period from April 1, 2020, to March 31, 2021. It’s not broken down by family.

Harry previously had told Oprah Winfrey that his family "literally cut me off financially" in the first quarter of 2020. He said he had to use money left to him by his mother, Princess Diana, to help pay for security for his family.

A spokesman for Clarence House told the BBC that “the Prince of Wales allocated a substantial sum” to Harry and Meghan, the duke and duchess, last year “to support them” with their transition in stepping down as senior members of the British royal family and relocating to California.

Is anyone surprised that Harry’s version of “cut off” means only getting millions of pounds? And when he said he was cut off in the “first quarter,” he really meant summer?

Isn't the fiscal year for the UK different, like the federal government here? Their first quarter ends in the summer. So that would mean Harry was telling the truth.

I love how PP read what Harry said and tried to make it look like she came up with it on her own, LOL

Yes, honey, we all read that, too. And Harry was on American TV for an American audience, he should know better.

“First Quarter” means Jan.-March in common usage in the UK, as well. They didn’t say “fiscal year,” and despite their “akshually it wasn’t technically incorrect” explanation now, the fact remains that they were spinning the facts to make Charles look as bad as they possibly could, and left a misleading impression, i.e., that they were “cut off” (given no money) earlier in the year. In fact, they were given millions into the summer. We should look at everything else they said in the same light.

It’s been abundantly clear for awhile that the Sussexes have a casual relationship with the truth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So how much for Harry and how much for Will?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/harry-charles-finances-royal-palace/2021/06/24/675411b0-d4ca-11eb-b39f-05a2d776b1f4_story.html

Prince Charles continued to financially support the Duke and Duchess of Sussex after they stepped down as senior members of the British royal family, according to financial accounts released Thursday.

Prince Charles’s office, Clarence House, published in its annual accounts that Charles paid his sons, Prince William and Prince Harry, and their families, a sum of $6.3 million. The annual report covers the period from April 1, 2020, to March 31, 2021. It’s not broken down by family.

Harry previously had told Oprah Winfrey that his family "literally cut me off financially" in the first quarter of 2020. He said he had to use money left to him by his mother, Princess Diana, to help pay for security for his family.

A spokesman for Clarence House told the BBC that “the Prince of Wales allocated a substantial sum” to Harry and Meghan, the duke and duchess, last year “to support them” with their transition in stepping down as senior members of the British royal family and relocating to California.

Is anyone surprised that Harry’s version of “cut off” means only getting millions of pounds? And when he said he was cut off in the “first quarter,” he really meant summer?

Isn't the fiscal year for the UK different, like the federal government here? Their first quarter ends in the summer. So that would mean Harry was telling the truth.

I love how PP read what Harry said and tried to make it look like she came up with it on her own, LOL

Yes, honey, we all read that, too. And Harry was on American TV for an American audience, he should know better.

“First Quarter” means Jan.-March in common usage in the UK, as well. They didn’t say “fiscal year,” and despite their “akshually it wasn’t technically incorrect” explanation now, the fact remains that they were spinning the facts to make Charles look as bad as they possibly could, and left a misleading impression, i.e., that they were “cut off” (given no money) earlier in the year. In fact, they were given millions into the summer. We should look at everything else they said in the same light.

Wrong. It's in the WaPo article

A spokesman for the Sussexes told The Washington Post that it was inaccurate to suggest a contradiction and that Harry’s comments were “in reference to the first quarter of the fiscal reporting period in U.K., which starts annually in April.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So how much for Harry and how much for Will?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/harry-charles-finances-royal-palace/2021/06/24/675411b0-d4ca-11eb-b39f-05a2d776b1f4_story.html

Prince Charles continued to financially support the Duke and Duchess of Sussex after they stepped down as senior members of the British royal family, according to financial accounts released Thursday.

Prince Charles’s office, Clarence House, published in its annual accounts that Charles paid his sons, Prince William and Prince Harry, and their families, a sum of $6.3 million. The annual report covers the period from April 1, 2020, to March 31, 2021. It’s not broken down by family.

Harry previously had told Oprah Winfrey that his family "literally cut me off financially" in the first quarter of 2020. He said he had to use money left to him by his mother, Princess Diana, to help pay for security for his family.

A spokesman for Clarence House told the BBC that “the Prince of Wales allocated a substantial sum” to Harry and Meghan, the duke and duchess, last year “to support them” with their transition in stepping down as senior members of the British royal family and relocating to California.

Is anyone surprised that Harry’s version of “cut off” means only getting millions of pounds? And when he said he was cut off in the “first quarter,” he really meant summer?

Isn't the fiscal year for the UK different, like the federal government here? Their first quarter ends in the summer. So that would mean Harry was telling the truth.

I love how PP read what Harry said and tried to make it look like she came up with it on her own, LOL

Yes, honey, we all read that, too. And Harry was on American TV for an American audience, he should know better.

“First Quarter” means Jan.-March in common usage in the UK, as well. They didn’t say “fiscal year,” and despite their “akshually it wasn’t technically incorrect” explanation now, the fact remains that they were spinning the facts to make Charles look as bad as they possibly could, and left a misleading impression, i.e., that they were “cut off” (given no money) earlier in the year. In fact, they were given millions into the summer. We should look at everything else they said in the same light.

Wrong. It's in the WaPo article

A spokesman for the Sussexes told The Washington Post that it was inaccurate to suggest a contradiction and that Harry’s comments were “in reference to the first quarter of the fiscal reporting period in U.K., which starts annually in April.”

NP. You need to work on your reading comprehension. The PP you’re responding to said that “first quarter” in common usage in the UK is the same as everywhere else, i.e. means January-March. And that conforms with the timing of when they moved to the US. The first quarter of the fiscal year may be different, and is what the Sussexes are now saying he meant, but given the context (American TV, American audience that wouldn’t be familiar with the UK fiscal year, non-intuitive definition, and timing of the move aligning with the US’ “first quarter”) he knew or should have known it would be interpreted in the American way. So he was being disingenuous to craft a narrative that his family cut them off and they arrived in California with nothing. It was spin (constructively a lie) to make them look sympathetic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is the Queen driving herself in that photo? It looks like it!

That's what I thought too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So how much for Harry and how much for Will?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/harry-charles-finances-royal-palace/2021/06/24/675411b0-d4ca-11eb-b39f-05a2d776b1f4_story.html

Prince Charles continued to financially support the Duke and Duchess of Sussex after they stepped down as senior members of the British royal family, according to financial accounts released Thursday.

Prince Charles’s office, Clarence House, published in its annual accounts that Charles paid his sons, Prince William and Prince Harry, and their families, a sum of $6.3 million. The annual report covers the period from April 1, 2020, to March 31, 2021. It’s not broken down by family.

Harry previously had told Oprah Winfrey that his family "literally cut me off financially" in the first quarter of 2020. He said he had to use money left to him by his mother, Princess Diana, to help pay for security for his family.

A spokesman for Clarence House told the BBC that “the Prince of Wales allocated a substantial sum” to Harry and Meghan, the duke and duchess, last year “to support them” with their transition in stepping down as senior members of the British royal family and relocating to California.

Is anyone surprised that Harry’s version of “cut off” means only getting millions of pounds? And when he said he was cut off in the “first quarter,” he really meant summer?

Isn't the fiscal year for the UK different, like the federal government here? Their first quarter ends in the summer. So that would mean Harry was telling the truth.

I love how PP read what Harry said and tried to make it look like she came up with it on her own, LOL

Yes, honey, we all read that, too. And Harry was on American TV for an American audience, he should know better.

“First Quarter” means Jan.-March in common usage in the UK, as well. They didn’t say “fiscal year,” and despite their “akshually it wasn’t technically incorrect” explanation now, the fact remains that they were spinning the facts to make Charles look as bad as they possibly could, and left a misleading impression, i.e., that they were “cut off” (given no money) earlier in the year. In fact, they were given millions into the summer. We should look at everything else they said in the same light.

Wrong. It's in the WaPo article

A spokesman for the Sussexes told The Washington Post that it was inaccurate to suggest a contradiction and that Harry’s comments were “in reference to the first quarter of the fiscal reporting period in U.K., which starts annually in April.”

NP. You need to work on your reading comprehension. The PP you’re responding to said that “first quarter” in common usage in the UK is the same as everywhere else, i.e. means January-March. And that conforms with the timing of when they moved to the US. The first quarter of the fiscal year may be different, and is what the Sussexes are now saying he meant, but given the context (American TV, American audience that wouldn’t be familiar with the UK fiscal year, non-intuitive definition, and timing of the move aligning with the US’ “first quarter”) he knew or should have known it would be interpreted in the American way. So he was being disingenuous to craft a narrative that his family cut them off and they arrived in California with nothing. It was spin (constructively a lie) to make them look sympathetic.

You sound unhinged. Harry has come from the UK and is speaking from his own experience with his own frame of reference. Demanding that he construct every sentence thinking of how an American audience will interpret it is ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

A grown man who already has millions to his name then signs deals for millions more then complains on world wide tv that his father won’t give him more money and he expects our sympathy?
What a dumbass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So how much for Harry and how much for Will?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/harry-charles-finances-royal-palace/2021/06/24/675411b0-d4ca-11eb-b39f-05a2d776b1f4_story.html

Prince Charles continued to financially support the Duke and Duchess of Sussex after they stepped down as senior members of the British royal family, according to financial accounts released Thursday.

Prince Charles’s office, Clarence House, published in its annual accounts that Charles paid his sons, Prince William and Prince Harry, and their families, a sum of $6.3 million. The annual report covers the period from April 1, 2020, to March 31, 2021. It’s not broken down by family.

Harry previously had told Oprah Winfrey that his family "literally cut me off financially" in the first quarter of 2020. He said he had to use money left to him by his mother, Princess Diana, to help pay for security for his family.

A spokesman for Clarence House told the BBC that “the Prince of Wales allocated a substantial sum” to Harry and Meghan, the duke and duchess, last year “to support them” with their transition in stepping down as senior members of the British royal family and relocating to California.

Is anyone surprised that Harry’s version of “cut off” means only getting millions of pounds? And when he said he was cut off in the “first quarter,” he really meant summer?

Isn't the fiscal year for the UK different, like the federal government here? Their first quarter ends in the summer. So that would mean Harry was telling the truth.

I love how PP read what Harry said and tried to make it look like she came up with it on her own, LOL

Yes, honey, we all read that, too. And Harry was on American TV for an American audience, he should know better.

“First Quarter” means Jan.-March in common usage in the UK, as well. They didn’t say “fiscal year,” and despite their “akshually it wasn’t technically incorrect” explanation now, the fact remains that they were spinning the facts to make Charles look as bad as they possibly could, and left a misleading impression, i.e., that they were “cut off” (given no money) earlier in the year. In fact, they were given millions into the summer. We should look at everything else they said in the same light.

Wrong. It's in the WaPo article

A spokesman for the Sussexes told The Washington Post that it was inaccurate to suggest a contradiction and that Harry’s comments were “in reference to the first quarter of the fiscal reporting period in U.K., which starts annually in April.”

NP. You need to work on your reading comprehension. The PP you’re responding to said that “first quarter” in common usage in the UK is the same as everywhere else, i.e. means January-March. And that conforms with the timing of when they moved to the US. The first quarter of the fiscal year may be different, and is what the Sussexes are now saying he meant, but given the context (American TV, American audience that wouldn’t be familiar with the UK fiscal year, non-intuitive definition, and timing of the move aligning with the US’ “first quarter”) he knew or should have known it would be interpreted in the American way. So he was being disingenuous to craft a narrative that his family cut them off and they arrived in California with nothing. It was spin (constructively a lie) to make them look sympathetic.

You sound unhinged. Harry has come from the UK and is speaking from his own experience with his own frame of reference. Demanding that he construct every sentence thinking of how an American audience will interpret it is ridiculous.

You sound easily manipulated. Which is obviously what Harry was doing, counting on people like you to blindly believe he and his wife fled to Montecito like penniless refugees.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So how much for Harry and how much for Will?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/harry-charles-finances-royal-palace/2021/06/24/675411b0-d4ca-11eb-b39f-05a2d776b1f4_story.html

Prince Charles continued to financially support the Duke and Duchess of Sussex after they stepped down as senior members of the British royal family, according to financial accounts released Thursday.

Prince Charles’s office, Clarence House, published in its annual accounts that Charles paid his sons, Prince William and Prince Harry, and their families, a sum of $6.3 million. The annual report covers the period from April 1, 2020, to March 31, 2021. It’s not broken down by family.

Harry previously had told Oprah Winfrey that his family "literally cut me off financially" in the first quarter of 2020. He said he had to use money left to him by his mother, Princess Diana, to help pay for security for his family.

A spokesman for Clarence House told the BBC that “the Prince of Wales allocated a substantial sum” to Harry and Meghan, the duke and duchess, last year “to support them” with their transition in stepping down as senior members of the British royal family and relocating to California.

Is anyone surprised that Harry’s version of “cut off” means only getting millions of pounds? And when he said he was cut off in the “first quarter,” he really meant summer?

Isn't the fiscal year for the UK different, like the federal government here? Their first quarter ends in the summer. So that would mean Harry was telling the truth.

I love how PP read what Harry said and tried to make it look like she came up with it on her own, LOL

Yes, honey, we all read that, too. And Harry was on American TV for an American audience, he should know better.

“First Quarter” means Jan.-March in common usage in the UK, as well. They didn’t say “fiscal year,” and despite their “akshually it wasn’t technically incorrect” explanation now, the fact remains that they were spinning the facts to make Charles look as bad as they possibly could, and left a misleading impression, i.e., that they were “cut off” (given no money) earlier in the year. In fact, they were given millions into the summer. We should look at everything else they said in the same light.

Wrong. It's in the WaPo article

A spokesman for the Sussexes told The Washington Post that it was inaccurate to suggest a contradiction and that Harry’s comments were “in reference to the first quarter of the fiscal reporting period in U.K., which starts annually in April.”

NP. You need to work on your reading comprehension. The PP you’re responding to said that “first quarter” in common usage in the UK is the same as everywhere else, i.e. means January-March. And that conforms with the timing of when they moved to the US. The first quarter of the fiscal year may be different, and is what the Sussexes are now saying he meant, but given the context (American TV, American audience that wouldn’t be familiar with the UK fiscal year, non-intuitive definition, and timing of the move aligning with the US’ “first quarter”) he knew or should have known it would be interpreted in the American way. So he was being disingenuous to craft a narrative that his family cut them off and they arrived in California with nothing. It was spin (constructively a lie) to make them look sympathetic.

Your parsing reminds me of my 6 year old, who feels terribly offended if I phrase something in a way she misinterprets. Then she accuses me of lying or breaking a promise. Thankfully, this is a stage she will outgrow.

I'm sure there were all kinds of financial and tax implications so it is entirely understandable that he'd be thinking in fiscal year terms.

[Anonymous]

YES The QUEEN drives cars. She loves driving, riding horses. What is wrong with you people, she's not made of paper mache.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So how much for Harry and how much for Will?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/harry-charles-finances-royal-palace/2021/06/24/675411b0-d4ca-11eb-b39f-05a2d776b1f4_story.html

Prince Charles continued to financially support the Duke and Duchess of Sussex after they stepped down as senior members of the British royal family, according to financial accounts released Thursday.

Prince Charles’s office, Clarence House, published in its annual accounts that Charles paid his sons, Prince William and Prince Harry, and their families, a sum of $6.3 million. The annual report covers the period from April 1, 2020, to March 31, 2021. It’s not broken down by family.

Harry previously had told Oprah Winfrey that his family "literally cut me off financially" in the first quarter of 2020. He said he had to use money left to him by his mother, Princess Diana, to help pay for security for his family.

A spokesman for Clarence House told the BBC that “the Prince of Wales allocated a substantial sum” to Harry and Meghan, the duke and duchess, last year “to support them” with their transition in stepping down as senior members of the British royal family and relocating to California.

Is anyone surprised that Harry’s version of “cut off” means only getting millions of pounds? And when he said he was cut off in the “first quarter,” he really meant summer?

Isn't the fiscal year for the UK different, like the federal government here? Their first quarter ends in the summer. So that would mean Harry was telling the truth.

I love how PP read what Harry said and tried to make it look like she came up with it on her own, LOL

Yes, honey, we all read that, too. And Harry was on American TV for an American audience, he should know better.

“First Quarter” means Jan.-March in common usage in the UK, as well. They didn’t say “fiscal year,” and despite their “akshually it wasn’t technically incorrect” explanation now, the fact remains that they were spinning the facts to make Charles look as bad as they possibly could, and left a misleading impression, i.e., that they were “cut off” (given no money) earlier in the year. In fact, they were given millions into the summer. We should look at everything else they said in the same light.

Wrong. It's in the WaPo article

A spokesman for the Sussexes told The Washington Post that it was inaccurate to suggest a contradiction and that Harry’s comments were “in reference to the first quarter of the fiscal reporting period in U.K., which starts annually in April.”

NP. You need to work on your reading comprehension. The PP you’re responding to said that “first quarter” in common usage in the UK is the same as everywhere else, i.e. means January-March. And that conforms with the timing of when they moved to the US. The first quarter of the fiscal year may be different, and is what the Sussexes are now saying he meant, but given the context (American TV, American audience that wouldn’t be familiar with the UK fiscal year, non-intuitive definition, and timing of the move aligning with the US’ “first quarter”) he knew or should have known it would be interpreted in the American way. So he was being disingenuous to craft a narrative that his family cut them off and they arrived in California with nothing. It was spin (constructively a lie) to make them look sympathetic.

Your parsing reminds me of my 6 year old, who feels terribly offended if I phrase something in a way she misinterprets. Then she accuses me of lying or breaking a promise. Thankfully, this is a stage she will outgrow.

I'm sure there were all kinds of financial and tax implications so it is entirely understandable that he'd be thinking in fiscal year terms.

The boldest. I'm truly trying to figure out why you think he should've geared his conversation in "American speak"? That would be stupid. And you sound even stupider suggesting such a thing.