Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The queen, etc. are obviously not thrilled to have a biracial, divorced, D-grade actress in the family. However, I don't think they are feeding negative tips to the press. Those are coming from staff who can and do supplement their stingy pay by occasionally letting slip.

I actually think the Queen is thrilled to have a biracial woman marry into the RF which is why they so eagerly allowed this marriage without properly vetting her as they would have a Caucasian. They moved too quickly and now they have to ride out her train wreck background/intentions. It’s a shame; there are many biracial/women of color who Harry could have chosen without as much drama or dysfunction as MM.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really liked her until these bad press reports came out right around Eugenie's wedding. Now it's hard to look at her the same. Whoever did this knew what they were doing-- as for the person who said royal fam has been doing this for decades--- its worse than that-- it's centuries! I don't think she'll last long, and I do think she is much more of an opportunist than anyone realized when she was first introduced.

We’ll probably find out one day that it was the Russians, just doing it for kicks because it was easy given their troll/fake news infrastructure.

No, it's the palace, likely Will. The palace is very, very good at this sort of thing. PP who used to like her is exactly the sort of gullible reader they aim for.

Or maybe some of it is actually true.

You don't understand how media manipulation works. Select kernels of information will be true. Some will be outright fakes. But they'll be mixed up. And often, the leaker(s) will carefully choose what is leaked that is true, leaving out key facts or mitigating details, encouraging the press to draw its own conclusions. The fake information will be vague, deliberately so.

For example, the leak about Kate crying at a dress fitting was a perfect example. Likely Kate was crying. The basic fact was probably true. But the linkage of Kate crying because of MMs behavior was implied, and encouraged. The details are deliberately vague and withheld, so gullible readers will fill in the blanks they want.

What's going on with MM is textbook media manipulation. You are just falling for it.

Hm perhaps you don't understand how media manipulation works either. Why would the RF plant the story about MM's mother being invited to Christmas and then declining? How did the RF or Will/Kate benefit from that story that was so clearly untrue? Obviously the only person made to look good in all that was MM which leads one to believe that she's planting stories herself. This also leads one to believe that she's manipulating the media and would justify why the RF might be trying to rein her in. Because we all know what she signed up for by marrying in to that family. Sounds like you're the one falling for it.

Anonymous wrote:I'm the gullible previous poster (LOL! Team KATE!) I really took issue with the unbuttoned jacket at the wedding. That was the giveaway that she was trying to fuel speculation or overshadow the bride. I didn't need any royal gossip to determine that on my own observations. Immediately thereafter she was in Australia thin as a rail.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The queen, etc. are obviously not thrilled to have a biracial, divorced, D-grade actress in the family. However, I don't think they are feeding negative tips to the press. Those are coming from staff who can and do supplement their stingy pay by occasionally letting slip.

What evidence do you have of the bolded? Or are you just assuming that they would not want a biracial family member? Why do you think that?

Other than one extended relative, I haven't seen any indication that they have a problem with her being biracial.

Anonymous wrote:The queen, etc. are obviously not thrilled to have a biracial, divorced, D-grade actress in the family. However, I don't think they are feeding negative tips to the press. Those are coming from staff who can and do supplement their stingy pay by occasionally letting slip.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The queen, etc. are obviously not thrilled to have a biracial, divorced, D-grade actress in the family. However, I don't think they are feeding negative tips to the press. Those are coming from staff who can and do supplement their stingy pay by occasionally letting slip.

What evidence do you have of the bolded? Or are you just assuming that they would not want a biracial family member? Why do you think that?

Other than one extended relative, I haven't seen any indication that they have a problem with her being biracial.

Anonymous wrote:The queen, etc. are obviously not thrilled to have a biracial, divorced, D-grade actress in the family. However, I don't think they are feeding negative tips to the press. Those are coming from staff who can and do supplement their stingy pay by occasionally letting slip.

Anonymous wrote:I really liked her until these bad press reports came out right around Eugenie's wedding. Now it's hard to look at her the same. Whoever did this knew what they were doing-- as for the person who said royal fam has been doing this for decades--- its worse than that-- it's centuries! I don't think she'll last long, and I do think she is much more of an opportunist than anyone realized when she was first introduced.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Megan Markle is a narcissist. No one stays in her life long term, and she tosses people away like trash once she doesn’t have a use for them anymore. A lot of people dislike her either because they are familiar with the type or there is something off about her and they sense it. I get the feeling there’s plenty of truth to the rumors. This woman has no real friends or relationships.

Go away, Samantha. You are mentally ill.

It’s not just her sister. She’s got no old friendships, no one from her family, she’s not that close with her mom, and her childhood best friend said the same thing about her. Perhaps palace rumors align for a simple reason - because it’s true. Narcissists can be very charming and good at making new relationships - they are masters of manipulation and mirroring.

Lady Colin Campbell agrees. I haven't followed her enough, but if what's said about her is true, she's a climber. She will indeed throw away anyone who taints her image. Harry will have to be a true co-narcissist (sometimes the term, co-dependent is used) for the marriage to last, as he will have enable her behavior by allowing her to overpower him.

Narcs are indeed charming but on an intimate level, they are cruel and love mindf**k games.

She has lost a few staff members . . . That's a sign of those who are fully awake in dealing with this personality disorder.

I know about narcissism on a personal level.

Or she lost a few staff members because they cant handle an American Duchess who does things differently.

I feel deep sympathy for her, she comes from a family that's obviously dysfunctional and doesn't care about dragging her down repeatedly. They haven't hesitated to say negative things about her to the international press who turn around and blast their comments on headlines around the world. Apparently her pregnancy isn't slowing them down all that much either. That family would do this to her says a lot.

But what PPs wrote - yes, she's obviously been affected by the dysfunction. She's probably destructive too. Despite her hard work to maintain her image, she hasn't been able to tamp down all the leaks that we've seen from her own behavior patterns.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really liked her until these bad press reports came out right around Eugenie's wedding. Now it's hard to look at her the same. Whoever did this knew what they were doing-- as for the person who said royal fam has been doing this for decades--- its worse than that-- it's centuries! I don't think she'll last long, and I do think she is much more of an opportunist than anyone realized when she was first introduced.

We’ll probably find out one day that it was the Russians, just doing it for kicks because it was easy given their troll/fake news infrastructure.

No, it's the palace, likely Will. The palace is very, very good at this sort of thing. PP who used to like her is exactly the sort of gullible reader they aim for.

Or maybe some of it is actually true.

You don't understand how media manipulation works. Select kernels of information will be true. Some will be outright fakes. But they'll be mixed up. And often, the leaker(s) will carefully choose what is leaked that is true, leaving out key facts or mitigating details, encouraging the press to draw its own conclusions. The fake information will be vague, deliberately so.

For example, the leak about Kate crying at a dress fitting was a perfect example. Likely Kate was crying. The basic fact was probably true. But the linkage of Kate crying because of MMs behavior was implied, and encouraged. The details are deliberately vague and withheld, so gullible readers will fill in the blanks they want.

What's going on with MM is textbook media manipulation. You are just falling for it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really liked her until these bad press reports came out right around Eugenie's wedding. Now it's hard to look at her the same. Whoever did this knew what they were doing-- as for the person who said royal fam has been doing this for decades--- its worse than that-- it's centuries! I don't think she'll last long, and I do think she is much more of an opportunist than anyone realized when she was first introduced.

We’ll probably find out one day that it was the Russians, just doing it for kicks because it was easy given their troll/fake news infrastructure.

No, it's the palace, likely Will. The palace is very, very good at this sort of thing. PP who used to like her is exactly the sort of gullible reader they aim for.

Or maybe some of it is actually true.

You don't understand how media manipulation works. Select kernels of information will be true. Some will be outright fakes. But they'll be mixed up. And often, the leaker(s) will carefully choose what is leaked that is true, leaving out key facts or mitigating details, encouraging the press to draw its own conclusions. The fake information will be vague, deliberately so.

For example, the leak about Kate crying at a dress fitting was a perfect example. Likely Kate was crying. The basic fact was probably true. But the linkage of Kate crying because of MMs behavior was implied, and encouraged. The details are deliberately vague and withheld, so gullible readers will fill in the blanks they want.

What's going on with MM is textbook media manipulation. You are just falling for it.

Anonymous wrote:I really liked her until these bad press reports came out right around Eugenie's wedding. Now it's hard to look at her the same. Whoever did this knew what they were doing-- as for the person who said royal fam has been doing this for decades--- its worse than that-- it's centuries! I don't think she'll last long, and I do think she is much more of an opportunist than anyone realized when she was first introduced.