The Duke & Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 3: March - April 2021


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
We have 70-something pages pinning all of the inconsistent claims of Meghan and Harry on themselves. And they - well, Meghan - dragged him there already. If the Sussexes had an ounce of the compassion they claim is so important, they would never, ever, put a good man (as I believe Justin Welby is) in that position or would clarify the information as soon as possible.

I fully and completely agree with you. However, I also really believe this is just another instance of Meghan not understanding, not realizing, and not even really caring that by throwing out what she considers a little personal tidbit to make them look personable and oh so down to earth, she totally threw the AoC under the bus. I honestly think she believed she was just “giving the people the personal tidbit they wanted” and probably didn’t even realize just how bad this made the AoC look or how much it called him and his position into question.
 
The difference I see here that with BRF, half of that is private security matters, the title issue is pretty damn simple - Archie was never meant to be a prince and should not be a prince under current rules - Charles can do with his private money whatever he wants, and the security falls under Met Police and Scotland Yard, not royal family.

Archbishop of Canterbury though is the principal leader of the Church of England, so basically the second most important person - after the Queen. If he ignored the CoE rules for Harry and Meghan by performing a fake wedding ceremony on May 19th or misled them by claiming their whatever-it-was in the garden as a valid wedding ceremony, he should not be a head of the Church of England, I don't care if they are royal or not, there is only one set of rules for everyone.

Many of my friends or family members were made to choose if they want to marry this year and not have all of the people they wanted present or postpone the wedding until lord-knows-when. And now Meghan can claim that she and Harry had two wedding ceremonies. It's something that should absolutely be addressed, because it puts the Church of England and Archbishop of Canterbury in a terrible light.

Yes, you are right, now that I think about it. Why do think the Archbishop refusing to comment, I am now suspicious of the baptism as well, how long does it take to be converted into COE?
 
Meghan is home in LA, USA where she was born. What about when their kids get older and it has to be explained to them Dad's family is racial and their parents moved because Mom wa suicial. It all comes around.
 
I fully and completely agree with you. However, I also really believe this is just another instance of Meghan not understanding, not realizing, and not even really caring that by throwing out what she considers a little personal tidbit to make them look personable and oh so down to earth, she totally threw the AoC under the bus. I honestly think she believed she was just “giving the people the personal tidbit they wanted” and probably didn’t even realize just how bad this made the AoC look or how much it called him and his position into question.

Yeah, there was no need whatsoever for her to have revealed that little piece of information.

I have always believed that what happened was that gathering in the garden arose out of some legitimate meeting concerning their forthcoming scheduled church wedding - perhaps a rehearsal - and M&H ended up reciting their personal vows to each other in his presence, and that he probably followed it with a blessing. I can understand them considering, in their hearts, that moment to be their real marriage. But, if that is the case, considering how these two pretend to be so jealous of their privacy, why the hell did they blurt it out to the world on Oprah's show? Bewildering!
 
Maybe it's just me but I got the feeling that with making the statement about their "wedding" three days before the "spectacle for the world", it almost sounded like telling the world that what they witnessed didn't matter. It was all a dog and pony show because they were already married. Dunno. It was just weird to me.
 
Yeah, there was no need whatsoever for her to have revealed that little piece of information.

I have always believed that what happened was that gathering in the garden arose out of some legitimate meeting concerning their forthcoming scheduled church wedding - perhaps a rehearsal - and M&H ended up reciting their personal vows to each other in his presence, and that he probably followed it with a blessing. I can understand them considering, in their hearts, that moment to be their real marriage. But, if that is the case, considering how these two pretend to be so jealous of their privacy, why the hell did they blurt it out to the world on Oprah's show? Bewildering!

Meghan spoke about that moment, and I believe it was the moment she believed they were truly married in their hearts.

However, Harry didn’t ‘blurt out’ anything about the blessing in the garden. He also wasn’t there when Meghan talked about Archie and the skin colour conversation(s) with Harry during her pregnancy, though I do happen to believe that there were remarks about the coming baby from a member of the family, and a certain former senior royal might well be the one.

It seems to me that far too often here things that Meghan confided to Oprah are imputed to Harry as if he also said them.

Harry came in towards the end of the interview, imparted what the relationship was like with his family (father and brother) the financial cut off and the Netflix/Spotify ‘streaming’ solutions, the system at the Palace when he wasn’t allowed to see his grandmother for urgent talks, stated that he had a conversation with a member of his family about the possible skin colour of future children which took him aback, and that was about it for anything earth shattering.
 
Last edited:
Maybe it's just me but I got the feeling that with making the statement about their "wedding" three days before the "spectacle for the world", it almost sounded like telling the world that what they witnessed didn't matter. It was all a dog and pony show because they were already married. Dunno. It was just weird to me.

That did occur to me but I dismissed the idea it on the basis that I do not believe that Meghan is stupid, and she's the one who said it. To tell the world, and particularly the British taxpayer and the British Royal Family and the established church, that the enormously time-consuming and expensive spectacle that they had spent a huge amount of money on/worked hard to prepare for/looked forward to watching for days/spent all day or night watching/bought new clothes to wear to/bought presents for/attended/etc. was of little or no consequence to them because what they did in private in the garden a few nights beforehand was more important to them personally, would be an absolutely crazy thing to do and could burn bridges that could never be repaired. Could it be that she is really so PO'd with Britain and the BRF that she would do that? Maybe she is, in which case I can understand the BRF being PO'd with her and never wanting to see her or speak to her again.
 
I do not understand why this information was shared at all - when I watched the talk show it seemed she was answering a question from Oprah. It seems to be part of a conversation that the rest has been edited out. So it is rather disjointed and not attached to anyone.
Personally I thought there might be someone in it - but I was told that this group it is illegal. So why mention it - I think Meghan likes the idea of pulling the wool of the press and the palaces eyes - she likes thinking that she is the smarter person in the room. She likes these little intrigues. Why share a private moment with Oprah, especially the words used - "No one else knows that" Did Oprah ask for other secrets? what was the original discussions?
Meghan believes she is a smart woman - that aside -between her and her advisors she is not as smart as she believes.
 
Meghan spoke about that moment, and I believe it was the moment she believed they were truly married in their hearts.

However, Harry didn’t ‘blurt out’ anything about the blessing in the garden. He also wasn’t there when Meghan talked about Archie and the skin colour conversation(s) with Harry during her pregnancy, though I do happen to believe that there were remarks about the coming baby from a member of the family, and a certain former senior royal might well be the one.

It seems to me that far too often here things that Meghan confided to Oprah are imputed to Harry as if he also said them.

Harry came in towards the end of the interview, imparted what the relationship was like with his family (father and brother) the financial cut off and the Netflix/Spotify ‘streaming’ solutions, the system at the Palace when he wasn’t allowed to see his grandmother for urgent talks, stated that he had a conversation with a member of his family about the possible skin colour of future children which took him aback, and that was about it for anything earth shattering.

These are very fair points Curryong, the only thing I would add is that Oprah made a comment that Harry had been watching the first part of the interview.

The comment re the marriage , for me, put a question mark over the whole interview, it was 'their truth.' Their version of events, an element of truth then embroidered to suit their narrative.
The AOC met them, and for whatever reason, they or him possibly suggested a small private moment/blessing. Lovely.

If Meghan had presented it like that , no problem, but no she said they phoned him up , and they were married in the garden just the 3 of them and nobody else knew. So that was her version of events that could not be true, so firstly that puts in question anything else she said, also puts in to doubt how much she respected her vows in the church that day. So what was the point of the baptism etc.
Secondly they put in the website that they were going to be financially independent, so why the shock that Charles removed finances, also Harry knows the public pay for security so why should the British taxpayer cover the expenses for security for them to live an independent financial life.
British royal protection officers cannot turn up in the USA carrying guns.

Once again it is 'their truth' , the opinion in the UK generally is that the financial independence they meant was no sovereign grant which was 5% of the income, they still intended that Charles should pay them.

The more I think about it the more I think that Oprah and Gayle have set the couple up, once or twice there were the false gasps from Oprah other times it was ' really'. She did not question anything took everything as their truth , even the marriage she did not question. Why not say was that legal, giving them the opportunity to clarify marriage /blessing.
 
Actually, I don't understand why it was such a difficult concept for her to grasp. Plenty of American businesses have limitations on what their employees can accept as free gifts for just doing their job, ie kickbacks. I work in home lending (have worked for several major banking corporations) and we have strict limits on how much we can accept or give as gifts for doing our part in facilitating a loan through the process. I am quite sure that many other industries have similar limits on kickbacks. Granted, Meghan was not in one of those industries, but surely she knows plenty of people from before she met Harry who have jobs in industries or government where kickbacks aren't allowed. I don't really have any sympathy for her being upset that she can't accept free clothing and accessories, trips, etc, just because she is a working royal.

I also work in finance, and we aren't allowed to accept expensive gifts because they could be construed as bribes. A box of chocolates or a bottle of wine at Christmas is fine. Expensive jewellery or a designer dress - not that anyone's ever offered me either! - would certainly not be. It's the same in a lot of jobs. I realise that people in showbusiness are given clothes and jewellery to wear at Oscar ceremonies etc, but surely it's not hard to understand that that's not how it works for Royalty.
 
I do not understand why this information was shared at all - when I watched the talk show it seemed she was answering a question from Oprah. It seems to be part of a conversation that the rest has been edited out. So it is rather disjointed and not attached to anyone.
Personally I thought there might be someone in it - but I was told that this group it is illegal. So why mention it - I think Meghan likes the idea of pulling the wool of the press and the palaces eyes - she likes thinking that she is the smarter person in the room. She likes these little intrigues. Why share a private moment with Oprah, especially the words used - "No one else knows that" Did Oprah ask for other secrets? what was the original discussions?
Meghan believes she is a smart woman - that aside -between her and her advisors she is not as smart as she believes.

No she isn't but she is good at speeches and has a lot of confidence. I really did think she was a very intelligent woman and then I watched this interview and it disabused me. Word on the street was that she was great at her public engagements. She was always well prepared and new her stuff. I figured what a clever, organised lady. Well obviously not.
 
No she isn't but she is good at speeches and has a lot of confidence. I really did think she was a very intelligent woman and then I watched this interview and it disabused me. Word on the street was that she was great at her public engagements. She was always well prepared and new her stuff. I figured what a clever, organised lady. Well obviously not.

That's not her being organised, or clever that's her staff preparing her...
 
I don't think anyone would care if they hadn't given a two hour interview about how they are victims.

I agree.

I also think that, given more time, Harry and Meghan could have worked out a way to stay as working members with a new slant. They could have enjoyed many stays in Commonwealth countries supporting many important initiatives which help many people. Perhaps Meghan underestimated how difficult it was to not express her opinion. I think royal life was not a happy fit and no one wants someone to stay and be miserable.
 
Meghan spoke about that moment, and I believe it was the moment she believed they were truly married in their hearts.

However, Harry didn’t ‘blurt out’ anything about the blessing in the garden. He also wasn’t there when Meghan talked about Archie and the skin colour conversation(s) with Harry during her pregnancy, though I do happen to believe that there were remarks about the coming baby from a member of the family, and a certain former senior royal might well be the one.

It seems to me that far too often here things that Meghan confided to Oprah are imputed to Harry as if he also said them.

Harry came in towards the end of the interview, imparted what the relationship was like with his family (father and brother) the financial cut off and the Netflix/Spotify ‘streaming’ solutions, the system at the Palace when he wasn’t allowed to see his grandmother for urgent talks, stated that he had a conversation with a member of his family about the possible skin colour of future children which took him aback, and that was about it for anything earth shattering.

You're right, of course; that particular piece of blurting was all Meghan's, and I did say that earlier in the post and in a previous one. I try to be careful to distinguish between what Meghan says and what Harry says, and I should have been careful to say "she" not "they". :flowers:
 
After all these new lies, bad behaviour, acting, stupidity, immaturity again!,
I do ask myself how anybody can still think positive about them, believe anything they say, write or air somehow using friends....

Seriously, can someone explain how this works in the US, are their polls about this?
Thank you.

We all know this is a question of educational background very much,
it is surely a special group of people watching Oprah or trash tv, this is the same maybe in every country. But H&M try to gain money for their foundation, those people watching&believing the interview are surely not those who will or can donate much money to them. So what is the idea behind the interview, beside revenge, mental sickness...?
Do they want to create a base of potential viewers for the coming netflix stuff?

I am not much into the US society, maybe someone can ry to explain?
Though I do not consider those two being very bright, after all the negative effects their actions had in the past, one should think they hired some advisors since, but what on earth did those intend with the interview?

Thanks!

And I, too, do believe that bringing an archbishop in such a situation is even worse than anything they did before or can do in the future. They seem to feel really no limits at all.
Unfortunately too little people are still close to church that this would bring them up against the couple.
But surely anybody with a rest if brain will distance themselves from the couple, one never knows what is next. I hope noone gives them a single dime!
 
I do not understand why this information was shared at all - when I watched the talk show it seemed she was answering a question from Oprah. It seems to be part of a conversation that the rest has been edited out. So it is rather disjointed and not attached to anyone.
Personally I thought there might be someone in it - but I was told that this group it is illegal. So why mention it - I think Meghan likes the idea of pulling the wool of the press and the palaces eyes - she likes thinking that she is the smarter person in the room. She likes these little intrigues. Why share a private moment with Oprah, especially the words used - "No one else knows that" Did Oprah ask for other secrets? what was the original discussions?
Meghan believes she is a smart woman - that aside -between her and her advisors she is not as smart as she believes.

I guess there was a thread of conversation about their wedding before it.

It's possible there *was* something in it, that for some reason the ABC did allow them to talk him into performing the full marriage ceremony twice - once without witnesses which makes it illegal and is designed to prevent talk about secret weddings. And then again "faking it" for the world (including witnesses) which makes a mockery of the vows and declaration and gets him in a LOT of trouble. And she didn't realise that.

I don't think it's likely but its a possibility.

The other one where it was either a vow rehearsal with a blessing afterwards or they wrote personalised vows with him there is more likely. If she had just said "we wrote vows to each other and he talked to us and blessed us and we celebrate that moment as special for us" there would be less of a problem.

I think she did like the idea of telling people that the big wedding was "just a spectacle" even though they didn't *have* to have it quite so big if they didn't want. Whilst the public would have been disappointed they could have gone smaller.

I do get that there was a lot of crazy going on before their wedding but this just seems another something it would have been way better to keep private.
 
I agree.

I also think that, given more time, Harry and Meghan could have worked out a way to stay as working members with a new slant. They could have enjoyed many stays in Commonwealth countries supporting many important initiatives which help many people. Perhaps Meghan underestimated how difficult it was to not express her opinion. I think royal life was not a happy fit and no one wants someone to stay and be miserable.

but that wasn't what they wanted. They wanted to be free to be able to go away when they liked, make money (however they did it), express themselves on politics (Meghan at least did this ) and generally then come back and do a bit of royal work when they wanted to, in order to keep their image of "royalty" before the public. I don't think that Meghan wanted to spend periods of time in commonwealth countries, she wanted the US of A. I dont think that "helping poeple" was all that high on their agenda really...it was helping themselves to a glamourous comfortable life..wihtout the dull duties and restrictions of royal duty.
 
I guess there was a thread of conversation about their wedding before it.

It's possible there *was* something in it, that for some reason the ABC did allow them to talk him into performing the full marriage ceremony twice - once without witnesses which makes it illegal and is designed to prevent talk about secret weddings. And then again "faking it" for the world (including witnesses) which makes a mockery of the vows and declaration and gets him in a LOT of trouble. And she didn't realise that.

I don't think it's likely but its a possibility.

The other one where it was either a vow rehearsal with a blessing afterwards or they wrote personalised vows with him there is more likely. If she had just said "we wrote vows to each other and he talked to us and blessed us and we celebrate that moment as special for us" there would be less of a problem.

I think she did like the idea of telling people that the big wedding was "just a spectacle" even though they didn't *have* to have it quite so big if they didn't want. Whilst the public would have been disappointed they could have gone smaller.

I do get that there was a lot of crazy going on before their wedding but this just seems another something it would have been way better to keep private.

Im sure it wasn't a rehearsal. Of course they'd have rehearsals but with a lot of people present at the chapel..not in a back garden. Perhaps they were talking about the wedding and said that they had private vows they wanted to say to each other and he humoured them by letting them do ths and gave them his blessing.. but I'm sure he never imagined that they would claim this as a wedding or publicize it...
 
Actually I don’t think that was the original idea. I’ve said this in here before, but COVID basically hurt them beyond measure. They wanted to build their “brand” and start making lots of money and they knew they had to do it while they were still hot commodities. That’s the reasoning behind the initial half in, half out idea. They know celebrity is fickle and doing part time Royal duties (glamorous ones only) would ensure they remained in the spotlight indefinitely.

COVID changed all. The pandemic has forced people to see celebrities worldwide in a different, a much less favorable, light. People have moved on from H&M as well and that has significantly impacted the opportunities available to them. Meanwhile, there’s massive bills to pay and very little money coming in. They’re bitter and panicking and that, along with some hope that they could get positive PR to get some new doors to open, resulted in the interview. Unfortunately for them, as we heard from Gayle King, that’s hasn’t opened up the BRF’s deep pockets. It remains to be seen if they’re able to use their victim narrative to make some desperately needed money from other sources.
Perhaps you're right. All the same, I htink that Harry, perhaps being more naive than Meghan DID think that Dad would continue to pay for him and if they earned more money that would be so much extra jam. But I get a vibe of Harry thinking "But Im a prince. I dont need to earn money. I dont know how to earn money. Dad pays for me and the taxpayer.. " .
It does seem as if they perhaps had intended to stay in Canada for longer but when the Canadian border was closing and the Can's said they wouldn't pay security any more, THEN they panicked and hurried to LA to live in a house belonging to someone they didn't even know... and then a bit later, they make the Netflix deal. If they were "organised" with a plan to earn their living abroad, why was it all so rushed? Perhaps too, they had planned to do speeches and of course the sppeches had to be postponed, or they realised that the speeches might not be a steady source of income?

And maybe Meghan by then had also gotten the idea that as a princess, she too had a right to be supported indefinitely by Charles so she also thought "we can make our own money but there's no big hurry on that, as Charles will pay for us.. he's got millions, and H is a prince and doesn't have a clue about business deals or getting work...". I can see her thinking that as C was giving them around £2M a year, he could just go on doing that, and didn't realise that in C's mind, that's tied to his supporting them in their royal work...
 
Last edited:
Im sure it wasn't a rehearsal. Of course they'd have rehearsals but with a lot of people present at the chapel..not in a back garden. Perhaps they were talking about the wedding and said that they had private vows they wanted to say to each other and he humoured them by letting them do ths and gave them his blessing.. but I'm sure he never imagined that they would claim this as a wedding or publicize it...

Yes but someone from Lambeth Palace muddied those waters by claiming it *was* a rehearsal a couple of weeks ago, among a couple of "explanations" of "just a ritual" from Sussex sources. Which begged the question "was Meghan really that "'confused'" or did he allow them to think it was real or say it was? Or did she just think "married three days before" sounded good in that moment?

I'm sure he never thought it would come up like this. I don't always agree with him but I do think he's a sincere and highly educated man who knows conducting two weddings one invalid and other "fake vows" could cause a lot of problems.


Yes, you are right, now that I think about it. Why do think the Archbishop refusing to comment, I am now suspicious of the baptism as well, how long does it take to be converted into COE?

I assume that happened and everything was fine and apparently Prince Charles was present for that among others. There's no set course like RCIA or period you have to wait if your vicar or Archbishop thinks you're ready. They probably had a few meetings and classes and went ahead.
 
Last edited:
I doubt if he "let them think it was real". It was probably a rehearsal in a loose sense.. (Not a big formal one) but perhaps a talk a few days before the wedding where they went over things one more time.. and they said that they had these "vows" they wanted to recite.. and he went along with it.. IMO he shouldn't have.. but he was probably aware that Meghan was new to the C of E and was trying to be nice to her and let her have her little bit of a "private loving moment" and then he gave them his blessing...which he thought of as the important bit... Of course it would never occur to him that she'd go prattling about what was meant to be a private moment, in the middle of an interview where she made a lot of false statements.... and now without openly calling her a liar, he can't say anyting direct...
 
Yes, it is, and such a strange coincidence that it should happen now. Of course it didn’t have anything to do with the aftermath of the Oprah interview and Meghan’s comments, lol!
 

Here is the original source of the story:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9384685/Queen-plans-diversity-drive.html

Note that the communication from the "royal source" states that "the work to do this has been under way for some time now" and has the "full support of the family", so perhaps this qualifies as general British Royal Family news rather than Sussex news?
 
I would think that someone "talked" about need for diversity training way before the advent of Meghan but never considered racism a part of the programme, safe in the belief that they were"above" all that sort of thing.
 
Actually, I don't understand why it was such a difficult concept for her to grasp. Plenty of American businesses have limitations on what their employees can accept as free gifts for just doing their job, ie kickbacks. I work in home lending (have worked for several major banking corporations) and we have strict limits on how much we can accept or give as gifts for doing our part in facilitating a loan through the process. I am quite sure that many other industries have similar limits on kickbacks. Granted, Meghan was not in one of those industries, but surely she knows plenty of people from before she met Harry who have jobs in industries or government where kickbacks aren't allowed. I don't really have any sympathy for her being upset that she can't accept free clothing and accessories, trips, etc, just because she is a working royal.
Because celebrities can accept freebies and there's no problem in that. And she thought about royal family in celebrity category, not public servants.
I fully and completely agree with you. However, I also really believe this is just another instance of Meghan not understanding, not realizing, and not even really caring that by throwing out what she considers a little personal tidbit to make them look personable and oh so down to earth, she totally threw the AoC under the bus. I honestly think she believed she was just “giving the people the personal tidbit they wanted” and probably didn’t even realize just how bad this made the AoC look or how much it called him and his position into question.
(And also of Meghan not understanding how things work in the Church of England, a church she joined consciously, as an adult :whistling:)

I honestly don't think they care about that. She just wanted that "oooh" reaction from the people, wanted to paint herself as someone who doesn't care about the pomp and pageantry, just fell in love with a Prince. And if she had to throw someone under the bus for it, well, but it made her look good for a minute or two.
Maybe it's just me but I got the feeling that with making the statement about their "wedding" three days before the "spectacle for the world", it almost sounded like telling the world that what they witnessed didn't matter. It was all a dog and pony show because they were already married. Dunno. It was just weird to me.
I think it was in a part to make them look so down to earth and normal, and the second as a dig to British public "I didn't need that, I did it for you" kind of thing. Well, maybe if they were already married by that point, they should give back all of the public money that was spent on their "fake wedding"... :lol:
Yes but someone from Lambeth Palace muddied those waters by claiming it *was* a rehearsal a couple of weeks ago, among a couple of "explanations" of "just a ritual" from Sussex sources. Which begged the question "was Meghan really that "'confused'" or did he allow them to think it was real or say it was? Or did she just think "married three days before" sounded good in that moment?

I'm sure he never thought it would come up like this. I don't always agree with him but I do think he's a sincere and highly educated man who knows conducting two weddings one invalid and other "fake vows" could cause a lot of problems.
That's why I think the Archbishop of Canterbury should just make a statement. Because right now we have Meghan's comments that they were married, some weird explanation from Lambeth Palace that doesn't really make sense and the wedding certificate dating 19th of May, 2018. What is funny to me, they just offered the press a golden egg - whenever things get boring, they could write long articles "is Meghan and Harry's marriage valid", based on the information they provided :lol:
 
Great. Now we have the AoC fully dragged into the mud Meghan has been so joyfully slinging around. Good on her. Lovely woman.

I wonder if we're going to have a leak on this. I suppose not. Meghan only authorizes her friends to run their big mouths on important issues, namely how she obsessively keeps a paper trail (with leaks of fabricated "evidence* from Meghan to Omid) and what a victim she is because the RF doesn't want to speak to her after her latest bout of mudslinging. Putting the AoC in an untenable position? Why, it doesn't matter! All that matters is that she looked so innocent and doe-eyed, sharing her special moment and the great sacrifice she made for the masses. She lowered herself to the level of a spectacle because they wanted a royal wedding while Meghan, the poor lamb, only wanted a private ceremony.

The irony is, I don't believe she wanted to create problems for the Archbishop. She just wanted to look cute, endearing and down to earth. But she did and in a typical Meghan style, it's never her fault. She never admits to a mistake, except for her ridiculous explanation that she would have apologised, just like Catherine did, if she had *hurt* someone. Which, of course, could never happen to the Bridezilla of the Hurt Feelings.

She now has the chance to practice what she said she would have done but of course, she hasn't done it this far.

Not an ounce of understanding for anyone else's plight.

Of course she didn't think it was a legal wedding. She just said it to sound endearing, probably not even realizing that she was creating problems.
 
Last edited:
That's not her being organised, or clever that's her staff preparing her...

Oh, but I thought the consensus here was that Meghan never took any notice of staff!

I also read several times that on engagements Meghan was ready with questions that showed she knew her stuff, had researched and studied subjects that were discussed at meetings and was very accomplished at speeches. These things were reported in the first months of her time in the Royal Family, before the royal reporters turned against her.
 
Here is the original source of the story:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9384685/Queen-plans-diversity-drive.html

Note that the communication from the "royal source" states that "the work to do this has been under way for some time now" and has the "full support of the family", so perhaps this qualifies as general British Royal Family news rather than Sussex news?

Regardless of if this was started in the reign of Queen Victoria - Meghan, Oprah and Gayle King would consider it Martin Luther King moment for themselves.
 
Oh, but I thought the consensus here was that Meghan never took any notice of staff!

I also read several times that on engagements Meghan was ready with questions that showed she knew her stuff, had researched and studied subjects that were discussed at meetings and was very accomplished at speeches. These things were reported in the first months of her time in the Royal Family, before the royal reporters turned against her.

I think they would all say that about her now. And have done only recently.

Regardless whether staff did the research. She still read it and prepared. It is very sad that it d9dnt work out.

But you know there were many many things that didn't mesh. The world of royals just want for her.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom