King Charles evicts Harry and Meghan from Frogmore

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They have so many residences. Bizzare.

The one in CA and…..?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought Frigmore was a gift from the Queen to H&M?... Why and how can Charles swoop in and "take it back"?

Are gifting laws different in the UK? Was it not a literal gift from the Queen to H&M ? Was the property relinquished when Harry relinquished his role (it was tied to his potential rile as a working royal)?

It’s owned by the crown estate. Harry is the second son, so he gets cut out. One day the same will happen to Charlotte and Louis. It’s a strange family dynamic when the oldest will eventually get everything including their siblings’ homes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Confused -- did H&M pay for the upgrades or did the taxpayers pay for it? The article you link to indicates that the renovation was taxpayer funded but your post indicates they paid out of pocket.

It does seem vindictive but on the other hand it's not like they are homeless. They will likely argue that this makes it too hard for them to travel to the UK because staying in a hotel or another house might not have the security benefits of Frogmore. I get why they would worry about that but I also think that's probably a solvable problem.

Sometimes I find this family drama engaging because aspects of it are relatable -- the emotionally distant parent, the family dynamics that pit siblings against each other, a bunch of dysfunctional communication styles and the one family member who is finally getting therapy and realizing his family has been super screwed up all along.

Other times I'm like whatever you are all rich and most of you didn't earn any of your money yourselves, surely you can find a way to sort this out without involving the rest of us. Megan's the only one whose ever had an honest job, the rest base their very privilege existences on the idiotic premise that a long time ago, God ordained their family as the rules of England. I mean, it's comically dumb. And all their problems flow from that ridiculous fiction they have all chosen to believe in. It's like the world's stupidest religious cult.

I think initial the tax payers paid for it because at that time H&M had no plans to leave. Once they left, they were made to pay. Ridiculous!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure how he can publish a tell-all, disparage his family, profit off this betrayal and expect the royal treatment when he returns for a visit. Is he that entitled to expect the taxpayers to continue to pay for him? These are the consequences of his actions.

But apparently no consequences for Andrew and Fergie! Hmmm.

That's a silly take.

How do? Are you aware of everything Andrew and Fergie have done over the years (Andrew being the worst by far)? If this decision is a consequence for what Harry has done, it sure seems like Charles is being hypocritical in favoring his disgraced brother and his ex-wife over his own son. Super petty.

Downsizing Andrew (who has already been PNGed) as a consequence to Harry? That's convoluted.

No. The point is that Andrew has faced little consequence for what he’s done, especially in comparison to what Harry has done and the consequences he’s faced. Charles and the rest of the family are clearly fine continuing to support and engage with Andrew but not Harry. The disparate treatment indicates that they care more about punishing Harry. This is yet another example of that.

Andrew has faced consequences. No, he hasn't gone to jail but, the legal situation isn't clear cut. He can't work as a Royal and has been kicked out of his huge mansion. But, he didn't tell everyone about the secrets of the Firm. If Harry hadn't done his world tour and moved away then none of this would have happened.

DP. I think the point that PP is making though is that most normal people don’t get more upset at “telling secrets” as they do at child rape and decades of palling around with two prolific child predators.

DP. Well you told us. If we don't think exactly the same as you, we are not normal people and we must prefer child rape...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What did he expect? He writes a tell-all book and humiliates Charlie Boy. Of course there was going to be blowback.

Which is really stupid by Charles, because it just makes all the negative things about him in the book more credible. Episodes like this make it much easier to believe Charles’s would have his people leak false narratives about Harry to the press to distract from negative press about Charles or make Charles more sympathetic as the single father to a troubled child.

I don't agree. Harry said he hates the institution and plans to live in the US. Why would you allow the house to just sit empty if he's never coming back? Plus it puts pressure on Harry to stay with his family instead of hiding out.

They don’t want him staying with them for fear he’ll write another book.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure how he can publish a tell-all, disparage his family, profit off this betrayal and expect the royal treatment when he returns for a visit. Is he that entitled to expect the taxpayers to continue to pay for him? These are the consequences of his actions.

But apparently no consequences for Andrew and Fergie! Hmmm.

That's a silly take.

How do? Are you aware of everything Andrew and Fergie have done over the years (Andrew being the worst by far)? If this decision is a consequence for what Harry has done, it sure seems like Charles is being hypocritical in favoring his disgraced brother and his ex-wife over his own son. Super petty.

Downsizing Andrew (who has already been PNGed) as a consequence to Harry? That's convoluted.

No. The point is that Andrew has faced little consequence for what he’s done, especially in comparison to what Harry has done and the consequences he’s faced. Charles and the rest of the family are clearly fine continuing to support and engage with Andrew but not Harry. The disparate treatment indicates that they care more about punishing Harry. This is yet another example of that.

Andrew's consequence is loss of stature, which is the only thing that he's ever really cared about. Royal Lodge requires lots of money for repair, which he can't afford. He's being forcibly downsized b/c he has no money and the royal bank closed when his mom died.

Is that true though? I find it hard to believe he didn’t inherit anything when she died.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure how he can publish a tell-all, disparage his family, profit off this betrayal and expect the royal treatment when he returns for a visit. Is he that entitled to expect the taxpayers to continue to pay for him? These are the consequences of his actions.

But apparently no consequences for Andrew and Fergie! Hmmm.

That's a silly take.

How do? Are you aware of everything Andrew and Fergie have done over the years (Andrew being the worst by far)? If this decision is a consequence for what Harry has done, it sure seems like Charles is being hypocritical in favoring his disgraced brother and his ex-wife over his own son. Super petty.

Downsizing Andrew (who has already been PNGed) as a consequence to Harry? That's convoluted.

No. The point is that Andrew has faced little consequence for what he’s done, especially in comparison to what Harry has done and the consequences he’s faced. Charles and the rest of the family are clearly fine continuing to support and engage with Andrew but not Harry. The disparate treatment indicates that they care more about punishing Harry. This is yet another example of that.

Andrew has faced consequences. No, he hasn't gone to jail but, the legal situation isn't clear cut. He can't work as a Royal and has been kicked out of his huge mansion. But, he didn't tell everyone about the secrets of the Firm. If Harry hadn't done his world tour and moved away then none of this would have happened.

DP. I think the point that PP is making though is that most normal people don’t get more upset at “telling secrets” as they do at child rape and decades of palling around with two prolific child predators.

DP. Well you told us. If we don't think exactly the same as you, we are not normal people and we must prefer child rape...

If the shoe fits.

[Anonymous]

The feelings of injustice from people who Harry and Meghan, multimillionaires living a life of luxury in Santa Barbara, wouldn’t give the time of day is bizarre.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agreed with OP. and prince andrew is moving in? It’s laughable how much more willing Charles is to take care of a serious sex offender than his own son and grandchildren, all because one person is more willing to keep his mouth shut and kiss Charles’s a**. Honestly, gross Charles. Clearly a terrible father with serious narcissistic issues.

+1

This is crazy! Charles said he won't leave his brother homeless and penniless.... but he has no trouble doing that to his son.

Harry is neither homeless or penniless. So save the drama.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agreed with OP. and prince andrew is moving in? It’s laughable how much more willing Charles is to take care of a serious sex offender than his own son and grandchildren, all because one person is more willing to keep his mouth shut and kiss Charles’s a**. Honestly, gross Charles. Clearly a terrible father with serious narcissistic issues.

+1

This is crazy! Charles said he won't leave his brother homeless and penniless.... but he has no trouble doing that to his son.

There were rumors that Charles is not the biological father of Harry. I wonder if Charles knows that these rumors are true.

Did you not watch Harry’s interviews or read the book? Charles used to make jokes about it to Harry. Great father.

[Anonymous]

Basic timeline

1. Charles gets blowback from meeting with a UK leader
2. Charles goes to the rota and tells them he’s evicted the Sussex which supposedly he started doing after the book came out but oh wouldn’t you know it he just thought to tell them now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What did he expect? He writes a tell-all book and humiliates Charlie Boy. Of course there was going to be blowback.

Which is really stupid by Charles, because it just makes all the negative things about him in the book more credible. Episodes like this make it much easier to believe Charles’s would have his people leak false narratives about Harry to the press to distract from negative press about Charles or make Charles more sympathetic as the single father to a troubled child.

I don't agree. Harry said he hates the institution and plans to live in the US. Why would you allow the house to just sit empty if he's never coming back? Plus it puts pressure on Harry to stay with his family instead of hiding out.

They don’t want him staying with them for fear he’ll write another book.

The concept of "staying with his family" is pretty different here than for the rest of us. Buckingham Palace can essentially operate like a hotel for visiting royals. If Harry and Meghan were to stay there, they could have minimal or no contact with other family members (but still all of the security). Charles himself doesn't even live there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agreed with OP. and prince andrew is moving in? It’s laughable how much more willing Charles is to take care of a serious sex offender than his own son and grandchildren, all because one person is more willing to keep his mouth shut and kiss Charles’s a**. Honestly, gross Charles. Clearly a terrible father with serious narcissistic issues.

+1

This is crazy! Charles said he won't leave his brother homeless and penniless.... but he has no trouble doing that to his son.

There were rumors that Charles is not the biological father of Harry. I wonder if Charles knows that these rumors are true.

Harry is a dead ringer for a friend of Diana's, James Hewitt. He's also a dead ringer for his grandfather, Prince Phillip. Go figure.

Harry is a dead ringer for his maternal aunt Jane, also a ginger. No clue about his paternity but he is all Spencer in appearance.

He has Phillip’s eyes. Pretty sure DNA tests were done for both boys when born. Charles is father to both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They made more money trashing the Royal family than the cost of a new home.

I want to know if they pulled even yet

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My husband has this kind of dysfunctional family. (Not the royal part but the rest of it). There are families that TRULY favor one child more than the other and TRULY are this mean, spiteful and vindictive. If you don’t believe Charles is doing this just to be a dick, well, you haven’t lived through it.

Maybe if you make millions writing an expose on your family, you get what you deserve?

Other than William hitting him, did he he really say or release anything that had not already been in the press? He just finally gave his side of the story.