Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:H+M's kids will go wherever William's kids go. Harry isn't raising second-class royals.

Having said that, everything depends on whether the kids have SNs. M used fertility treatments, right?

Based off her age and how quickly she got pregnant after her wedding, that is definitely a possibility.

I hate to say it, and I don't know if stats back it up, but of all the twins I know conceived using AR, at least one twin has some health and development issues. I would be very scared to be carrying twins. Whatever the case is for her, hopefully she has a healthy pregnancy. But I wouldn't be cracking open the champagne eagerly awaiting all the OMG twin cuteness.

Anonymous wrote:H+M's kids will go wherever William's kids go. Harry isn't raising second-class royals.

Having said that, everything depends on whether the kids have SNs. M used fertility treatments, right?

Based off her age and how quickly she got pregnant after her wedding, that is definitely a possibility.

Anonymous wrote:Full shots of Charlene at 5 months pregnant - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2713751/Pregnant-Princess-Charlene-Monaco-steps-husband-Prince-Albert-charity-ball.html

The expectant mother, who is due to give birth in December, wowed in a sleeveless midnight blue floor-length gown, which gave just a small hint of her growing baby.

They didn't even know she was carrying twins in August when she gave birth in December! Now that is keeping palace secrets.

Isn’t Charlene also 5’10 or 5’11? It’s easier to carry small when your torso is longer. Meghan is a lot shorter and has less torso to hide the belly.

Anonymous wrote:H+M's kids will go wherever William's kids go. Harry isn't raising second-class royals.

Having said that, everything depends on whether the kids have SNs. M used fertility treatments, right?

She was pregnant 4 weeks from her wedding - so we're all going to go with no.

Go somewhere else with that trash talk.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t hate Kate. I just want her to work. She needs to show us how much she values being a royal

That’s your opinion not a fact. Learn the difference. I think that taking care of three kids under 5 is a hell of a lot of work.

No one cares what the first PP thinks. Kate is spending time being a parent. That’s her decision and most people think it’s a good one.

You have no idea what most people think about Kate.

You are beating a dead horse here. Kate is doing just fine and you can't stand it. It eats you up that you're hero Meghan will always be a distant second.

PP here. Lady, you are crazy. What I stated was a fact. You have no idea what most people think about Kate. You also have no idea what most people think about strawberry ice cream, unicorns, or the chance that the Cubs will win the World Series. You sound like a totally nutty head case when you talk like you know what "most people" think about Kate.

Lol what do you think the poll people keep posting measures? The stupidity is mind boggling here. The people are a-ok with Kate, psychos here aren’t.

You don't understand how polling works, obviously. Poor thing. Please keep talking about how you know how everyone thinks, all the time.

Well, bless your heart! None of us can truly know what anyone thinks about anything ever. You got it, babe!

H+M's kids will go wherever William's kids go. Harry isn't raising second-class royals.

Having said that, everything depends on whether the kids have SNs. M used fertility treatments, right?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t hate Kate. I just want her to work. She needs to show us how much she values being a royal

That’s your opinion not a fact. Learn the difference. I think that taking care of three kids under 5 is a hell of a lot of work.

No one cares what the first PP thinks. Kate is spending time being a parent. That’s her decision and most people think it’s a good one.

You have no idea what most people think about Kate.

You are beating a dead horse here. Kate is doing just fine and you can't stand it. It eats you up that you're hero Meghan will always be a distant second.

PP here. Lady, you are crazy. What I stated was a fact. You have no idea what most people think about Kate. You also have no idea what most people think about strawberry ice cream, unicorns, or the chance that the Cubs will win the World Series. You sound like a totally nutty head case when you talk like you know what "most people" think about Kate.

Lol what do you think the poll people keep posting measures? The stupidity is mind boggling here. The people are a-ok with Kate, psychos here aren’t.

You don't understand how polling works, obviously. Poor thing. Please keep talking about how you know how everyone thinks, all the time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meghan does NOT have to send her kid to boarding school. Charles actually good have gone to school locally and lived in the palace but it was Phillip who insisted on sending him to Scotland. All the top boarding schools usually offer acceptance to "day students"- no reason they won't do that. They really are in a better position than William and Kate to make different choices.

But Phillip insisted because the Queen’s education was sorely lacking. Reporters gloss over it now but she couldn’t even hold a proper dinner conversation on politics or foreign affairs when she became monarch. She had really good Prime Ministers who ran the nation without interference then.

NP. I know we shouldn’t trust “The Crown” on matters of historical accuracy, but according to them, the Queen wanted to send Charles to Eton. It was Philip who insisted on the Scottish boarding school (that latter point I have heard elsewhere as well).

Does anyone know whether Beautice and Eugenie attended boarding school? They would be their generation’s equivalent to Harry and Meghan’s kids.

Yes, they both went to boarding schools more than an hour away from London or their parent's estate. They went to all-girls boarding schools while the boys went to all-boys.

For Eton, the Queen wanted to follow tradition with Charles but Phillip was feeling emasculated as head of the family and it didn't help that Charles was a bit of a wimp growing up so P thought it would toughen him up.

Eton is a brilliant school and I think in many respects if Phillip wasn't looking to put his 'stamp' on the family, it would have been chosen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meghan does NOT have to send her kid to boarding school. Charles actually good have gone to school locally and lived in the palace but it was Phillip who insisted on sending him to Scotland. All the top boarding schools usually offer acceptance to "day students"- no reason they won't do that. They really are in a better position than William and Kate to make different choices.

But Phillip insisted because the Queen’s education was sorely lacking. Reporters gloss over it now but she couldn’t even hold a proper dinner conversation on politics or foreign affairs when she became monarch. She had really good Prime Ministers who ran the nation without interference then.

NP. I know we shouldn’t trust “The Crown” on matters of historical accuracy, but according to them, the Queen wanted to send Charles to Eton. It was Philip who insisted on the Scottish boarding school (that latter point I have heard elsewhere as well).

Does anyone know whether Beautice and Eugenie attended boarding school? They would be their generation’s equivalent to Harry and Meghan’s kids.

Full shots of Charlene at 5 months pregnant - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2713751/Pregnant-Princess-Charlene-Monaco-steps-husband-Prince-Albert-charity-ball.html

The expectant mother, who is due to give birth in December, wowed in a sleeveless midnight blue floor-length gown, which gave just a small hint of her growing baby.

They didn't even know she was carrying twins in August when she gave birth in December! Now that is keeping palace secrets.

The first lady is showing twice as big as Meghan in that picture.

Meghan looks barely pregnant.

The other woman looks like she is 6 months or more along.

I believe it. She looks just like Charlene pregnant at 5 months with her twins. The princess of Monaco carried small until almost the 6th month.

https://www.hellomagazine.com/royalty/2014092621147/princess-charlene-pregnant-new-york/

Charlene at 5 months.


Meghan at 4 months.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does that person keep posting that Meghan is having twins?

She is not showing like someone carrying twins.

The National Enquirer said so, so it must be true.

I'm the one who thinks she's having twins. The magazine I followed had articles that she was pregnant all the way back in August. Their sources weren't wrong and they say twins.

If she is almost 5 months pregnant, she is not showing like she is having twins.

She is showing small even for a single baby.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sorry but W+K are just weird. I can't wait to see H+M out in public with their twins everywhere.

Princess Charlene of Monaco with her two three-year-olds at a rugby tournament yesterday are just too adorable.

Ugh. She has dead sad eyes married to a toad looking husband. No match for the stunning Kate and Meaghan. I think both pairs, W+K and H+M, look great.

Camilla is an unfortunately bad looking woman who always looked like an old crone. The good part is that now that she is aged, she looks the same as when she was young. Bad looking people are blessed because their looks cannot become worse.

Camilla is lovely in her own right.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does that person keep posting that Meghan is having twins?

She is not showing like someone carrying twins.

The National Enquirer said so, so it must be true.

I'm the one who thinks she's having twins. The magazine I followed had articles that she was pregnant all the way back in August. Their sources weren't wrong and they say twins.