The Duke and Duchess of Sussex with Oprah I - Pre-interview, Feb-March 2021

[Lee-Z]

On one of the general dutch newssites, the last days people reacted to the H&M situation according to the narrative layed out, applauding H&M getting out of that nasty and old fashioned BRF and out of reach of the british gutter press, and doing their own thing as they want it.

What's interesting what the latest 'teaser' that has leaked is that even that general public reacts with "Well...what did she expect?" "You can't say everything when you're in a particular job and certainly not as a royal" "she wasn't a naive woman when she married, how could she not have known this"

It'll be interesting to see if Oprah and Meghan manage to get their narrative across the way they intend it..

 

[Hallo girl]

Another trailer on the tv, building up the drama. They want a huge audience to get the money in from the ads.

 

[tihkon2]

My thoughts exactly, Harry and Meghan met in 2016 and just a year later, they announced their engagement. I think they got engaged a bit too fast compared to other royals in their generation.

I assume they did everything at hyperspeed because of her age and wanting to have children sooner, rather than later.

 

[Lilyflo]

No, the BRF should not speak their truth. They should stick to their "Never complain, never explain" way of doing business. They never spoke up when Meghan was being brutalized in the press, so they should not speak up now.

You make a fair point and I've been vocal here about my abhorrence of the relentlessly negative press coverage she endured. However, the BRF didn't defend Carole Middleton, Catherine or Camilla when they were pilloried so they probably weren't going to change their usual stance. One thing we do know though is that when the BRF (as an institution rather than the individuals) is criticised by its own members, there's a payback somewhere along the line because any threat to the monarchy has repercussions. I'm neither defending nor censuring the BRF in this complex situation but merely stating what I think will happen based on previous events.

 

[MaiaMia_53]

...
TRF friends, this line from the Oprah interview is absolutely a huge revelation. Despite many denying it could possibly be the case when others said it was, the couple has, in fact, been planning to sit down with Oprah since the wedding. They invited her there with the intention of sitting down with her. And they knew if that happened, they would be out... and invited her anyway, and took the "exchange" anyway. There was never any good-faith intention to have this work. "Let's call this what it is," and it's becoming clear with every line that Oprah drips from this interview.

It's also expressed in the article I linked that M&H were at some point hoping to give an interview to Oprah (approved by the firm), which probably would have been more along the lines of discussing their relationship and their work as royals. And it would have served as positive p.r. for the image of the royal family, had M&H been supported, and had there been patience regarding the intensity of interest in them, which wasn't and isn't going to last forever.

The fact is: the increasing and current ongoing negative opposition in the U.K. media against M&H, and especially against Meghan have only served to bring more attention to them. All of this divisiveness, and the eventual Sussexit didn't have to happen. It all could have turned out differently to the full benefit of the monarchy, had there actually existed feelings of goodwill and understanding from all parties. I also believe that had Sir Christopher Geidt not been forced out in 2017, things might have turned out differently for M&H staying productively within the firm.

At the end of the day, had royal life still been too much for Meghan, and had Harry still decided to leave to protect his family, then why couldn't that have been worked out amicably and reasonably, like we see in some other European royal families? I disagree that M&H did not have good intentions from the beginning. There's no indication of that kind of motivation in their words and behavior during the engagement interview. I believe Harry thought that things would work out because he probably felt his family would ultimately provide solid support.

For those who don't realize, even the book by Durand and Scobie had its genesis shortly after M&H were married. That book was originally supposed to cover the first few years of their lives in the royal family. Harry is not the heir to the throne, and as I said, the intense interest in him and Meghan would have dissipated over time. At the same time, the monarchy would have been able to further prosper via benefit of their service had the media been kept in check. The book under a different title, and an interview with Oprah by M&H as working royals could also have been of benefit to the firm had there been handlers with up-to-date vision and forward thinking strategies. Kate & William could have been briefly included in the interview as well, as the supportive future king and queen. The 'Fab Four' could have been presented as the reality many of us thought the concept was in the beginning.

In regard to your list of privileges, the royal wedding in and of itself was p.r. for the royal family which brought in huge amounts of revenue for Britain and for the monarchy. It was not something given purely out of benevolence to Meghan and Harry, who I'm sure would have been just as pleased to have a completely private wedding because they married for love, not for fame and prestige. As well, M&H could have stepped away right from the beginning had they been informed there would be such opposition to their marriage, coupled with dislike and lack of acceptance directed toward Meghan.

There is responsibility for the current state of affairs on both sides. Things didn't work out for many reasons, but not for the deceptive, conspiratorial reasons those who prefer to demonize Meghan want to believe.

 

[RandyDrx]

The fact is: the increasing and current ongoing negative opposition in the U.K. media against M&H, and especially against Meghan have only served to bring more attention to them. All of this divisiveness, and the eventual Sussexit didn't have to happen. It all could have turned out differently to the full benefit of the monarchy, had there actually existed feelings of goodwill and understanding from all parties. I also believe that had Sir Christopher Geidt not been forced out in 2017, things might have turned out differently for M&H staying productively within the firm.

I think Harry's PR has been abysmal since ELF left.

 

[Duchess Sophie]

I vaguely recall an interview where Diana was asked something similar and she said she tried.
There were also several scenes in the Crown- (again "mostly" fiction but it gives you an idea) of Diana trying to on multiple occasions speak with the powers that be and the Queen only to be brushed off. She only got their attention when things were at their worst.

Perhaps the same was true for the couple- they were perhaps ignored, brushed off,and told to "fall in line". They likely got the attention when they made up their minds to leave for good.

From the BRF's perspective: in quite a few recent biogeaphies on diana it is noted that the BRF did try to help (with therapists and such) but Diana was convinced she didn't need help (or at least this kind). At a certain point the BRF stopped.


Just to give another perspective. Perhaps the BRF also tried with Meghan.

 

[Mbruno]

The heart has it's reasons, and love knows none , as the saying goes .
She was made welcome , as far as we know, Christmas at Sandringham , tour of the U K. Day trip with the Queen .

And two high profile official tours overseas to Australia/Oceania and Southern Africa. Plus an official Commonwealth role. Maybe Meghan disliked that and would rather do something else, but, within the BRF system, things like that indicate that they were valued members of the organization who were being given great responsibility, not the other way around as they claim (i.e., that the gray suits or the Cambridges were "holding them back" and were jealous of their popularity).

 

[Lilyflo]

The book under a different title, and an interview with Oprah by M&H as working royals could also have been of benefit to the firm had there been handlers with up-to-date vision and forward thinking strategies. Kate & William could have been briefly included in the interview as well, as the supportive future king and queen. The 'Fab Four' could have been presented as the reality many of us thought the concept was in the beginning.

The 'Fab Four' was never a reality, nor could it ever be. The monarchy is deeply hierarchical and despite the joint initiatives, the direct heirs will always be promoted more, covered more and have their status constantly reinforced.

There is responsibility for the current state of affairs on both sides. Things didn't work out for many reasons, but not for the deceptive, conspiratorial reasons those who prefer to demonize Meghan want to believe.

I agree with you on this point.

 

[MaiaMia_53]

... But by criticizing palace staff, Meghan and Harry are giving credence to the allegations of bullying...

You mention being disappointed in Meghan and Harry for giving this interview. As I previously detailed, they've put up with a lot in silence. How much more were they expected to take? Endless abuse and unrelenting false stories and damaging mischaracterizations in the media while they remain silent?

I'm disappointed in the institution and in the top level staff. I also feel that there were already a lot of festering problems within the palaces and within the monarchy and within the family itself historically, well before Meghan and Harry ever met. There are plenty of contemporary accounts, one in The Spectator in 2019 or early 2020, about the arguments that Harry & William and Charles, William & Harry would get into that Sir Christopher Geidt was always able to smooth over and resolve. That's why it's a shame Geidt was forced out, in the same year as M&H's engagement.

Everything that has happened indicates a need to separate and to set boundaries and guidelines between the workings of the firm and intimate family interactions. The monarchy needs to come into the 21st-century. Hopefully, in the long term, beneficial change for the British monarchy will be the result of M&H carving out independence and telling their side of the story.

I would remind you that we've only seen brief clips of the interview. In none of the clips were particular staff or particular family members named or singled out. We have to see the full interview first, as I said earlier, before we can gain a complete understanding of tone and content.

 

[tommy100]

Why was Meghan surprised she couldn't do an interview with Oprah after her engagement? Surely all that shows is how woefully unprepared and how much knowledge she lacked for marrying into the RF.

I doubt their aides had to sit in on private calls so I'd suggest the reason they sat in on this one was because it was a call to an interviewer to a royal fiancee as opposed to friend-friend.

 

[Durham]

Yet the press negativity continued. The negative coverage of the wreath laying denial;

That was entirely warranted of course. Their actions were crass. Lots of discussion on TRF at the time explaining why.

 

[tommy100]

I think Harry's PR has been abysmal since ELF left.

Harry always seemed to do well when being commanded by a senior officer - which both ELF and Geidt would have been in their military roles.

 

[MaiaMia_53]

The 'Fab Four' was never a reality, nor could it ever be. The monarchy is deeply hierarchical and despite the joint initiatives, the direct heirs will always be promoted more, covered more and have their status constantly reinforced.

Sure, 'Fab Four' was just a catch-phrase and a concept put forward by the media. It was a source of fantasy p.r. that could have worked in the monarchy's favor, not that it had to actually be a reality behind-the-scenes. After all, why do you think there's been bandied about in the media this new catch-phrase: 'Magnificent Seven'?

The monarchy is hierarchical, for sure, but did it have to be stuffy, old-fashioned and set in its ways? Harry was very accommodating, loving and supportive of his family even as he was grieving and dealing with growing pains and emotional challenges in his teens and twenties. He put up with a lot as a troubled young man who found purpose in the military and with his creation of Sentebale and Invictus. He was helpful to his family and even accommodating to the media as a bachelor, as a spare and a third-wheel. It's normal for his focus to change when he got married and had a core family to love and protect. He didn't love his extended royal family any less when he got married. There's plenty of evidence he and Meghan both wanted to contribute and to be a productive part of the royal firm. Why couldn't they have been met half-way? Why couldn't his family be happy for Harry once he found happiness with the love of his life? Why?

If the royal handlers were smarter and had forward thinking vision, they could have capitalized on all of the increased interest in the British royals that the union of M&H generated. Sadly, those in charge, blew it. And the greedy media aided and abetted in blowing things up by their negative treatment of M&H because they wanted more access to them. Why did the media ever think blatant abuse was going to give them more access? Did no one in the media and in the firm ever truly know and understand Harry???

M&H were determined not to sit by quietly and remain targets, thus eventually ending up as casualties. Isn't it possible to fully see this reality?

 

[Muhler]

I find the statements we see and hear coming from Meghan more and more perplexing!

I look forward to learn what Harry will hopefully add to this, because his comments will IMO help to understand what on earth is going on.

A) Either Meghan was unable to understand what was required of her, in regards to the restriction all royals have to live under. - That's next to unbelievable, for an intelligent and well educated, mature woman.
B) Meghan was unwilling to accept and adhere to these restrictions and/or believed they did not or should not apply to her. - That's quite remarkable for a newbie royal!
C) She genuinely believe that she was subjected to most unreasonable restrictions and that they were deliberately aimed at her personally, for personal reasons. And from the top down! - Either she is right. Or it says something about her state of mind or her perception of reality. Both options are deeply disturbing!
D) This is part of H&M's "justification-narrative." That is explaining/explaining away why they left in the way they did. In which case they are blaming everybody else but themselves. - They may be able to convince themselves and their fanbase about the truth of this, but I'd say the vast majority watching this will not.

So what Harry has to say is IMO crucial to understanding this.
If he supports his wife (he should of course, but not to the point of self-destruction) and even says something similar. There is either some truth in this.
Or he is the husband currently walking the Earth who takes the words "I thee worship" most literal! And he has gone completely and uncompromising into protective mode.
Or he too shares Meghan's (possible) belief that the restrictions does not apply to them. And that is most interesting for a mature man, who has lived within the system for all his life. - I.e. they share a common misconception of their own significance and dare I say destiny.

As I see this right now, unless H&M can produce footage of senior members of the BRF sticking needles into dolls depicting H&M. Or footage of the staff, dancing in a circle around a burning effigy of Meghan, this is gonna hurt them - bad!

One of the main functions of a royal staff is to prevent the royals from doing something stupid. I find it hard to imagine that H&M are not aware of that.

 

[poppy7]

You mention being disappointed in Meghan and Harry for giving this interview. As I previously detailed, they've put up with a lot in silence. How much more were they expected to take? Endless abuse and unrelenting false stories and damaging mischaracterizations in the media while they remain silent?

I'm disappointed in the institution and in the top level staff. I also feel that there were already a lot of festering problems within the palaces and within the monarchy and within the family itself historically, well before Meghan and Harry ever met. There are plenty of contemporary accounts, one in The Spectator in 2019 or early 2020, about the arguments that Harry & William and Charles, William & Harry would get into that Sir Christopher Geidt was always able to smooth over and resolve. That's why it's a shame Geidt was forced out, in the same year as M&H's engagement.

Everything that has happened indicates a need to separate and to set boundaries and guidelines between the workings of the firm and intimate family interactions. The monarchy needs to come into the 21st-century. Hopefully, in the long term, beneficial change for the British monarchy will be the result of M&H carving out independence and telling their side of the story.

I would remind you that we've only seen brief clips of the interview. In none of the clips were particular staff or particular family members named or singled out. We have to see the full interview first, as I said earlier, before we can gain a complete understanding of tone and content.

I don't know if I disagree or agree with this.

To royal family is a ruthless institution where one's staff member sends another down the river to spike a story. To quote it really isnt personal. And William and Harry know what it is like. They have seen it their entire life. That Harrry somehow 'didn't' seem to know indicates to me that he was basically just babysat by a succession of staff until her got married and his wife convinced him to do it her way and then the whole thing fell apart.

I think they were bullying. I think they felt aggrieved. I think they wanted it their way and couldn't see why it wasn't. I think the constraints of that institution frustrated them. I do not think that anything was ever personal and that anyone set out to target them as they seem to think. I think she just didn't understand and by extension then Harry didn't.

Good luck to them. To quote a fictional Philip to a fictional Diana 'You thought it was about you and you forgot what it was actually about.'

But you know what was ahead...middle agedom where you'd be opening hospitals while no press paid attention and the latest news flash was that George got drunk inna night club and who Charlotte's new boyfriend/girlfriend is. And trust me neither of them wanted that.

 

[US Royal Watcher]

You mention being disappointed in Meghan and Harry for giving this interview. As I previously detailed, they've put up with a lot in silence. How much more were they expected to take? Endless abuse and unrelenting false stories and damaging mischaracterizations in the media while they remain silent?

I'm disappointed in the institution and in the top level staff. I also feel that there were already a lot of festering problems within the palaces and within the monarchy and within the family itself historically, well before Meghan and Harry ever met. There are plenty of contemporary accounts, one in The Spectator in 2019 or early 2020, about the arguments that Harry & William and Charles, William & Harry would get into that Sir Christopher Geidt was always able to smooth over and resolve. That's why it's a shame Geidt was forced out, in the same year as M&H's engagement.

Everything that has happened indicates a need to separate and to set boundaries and guidelines between the workings of the firm and intimate family interactions. The monarchy needs to come into the 21st-century. Hopefully, in the long term, beneficial change for the British monarchy will be the result of M&H carving out independence and telling their side of the story.

I would remind you that we've only seen brief clips of the interview. In none of the clips were particular staff or particular family members named or singled out. We have to see the full interview first, as I said earlier, before we can gain a complete understanding of tone and content.

I hear what you are saying but I don't see any proof that Harry and Meghan's former staff were "unrelenting false stories and damaging mischaracterizations." You are assuming that Harry and Meghan's "truth" is objective fact and I am not sure that it is. The anecdotes we've seen so far do not reflect that the staff mistreated Meghan. As others have pointed out, the monarchy revolves around the Queen, not the wife of one of her grandsons (even if he is the son of the direct heir). If the staff was doing what the Queen wanted, they were doing their jobs.

On the other hand, the descriptions of bullying that I have seen do not appear serious (I get 3:00 a.m. emails - I read them when I get to work). Certainly not enough to cause a normal person PTSD.

It seems to me that Meghan and her staff had different ideas, goals, and priorities. I tend to think that if they had been patient, Charles would have been more open to Meghan and Harry's ideas but until that time, the royal family represents the Queen.

M&H were determined not to sit by quietly and remain targets, thus eventually ending up as casualties. Isn't it possible to fully see this reality?

It is possible to see that, if that is, in fact, the reality. By the same token, is it possible for people who agree with Meghan and Harry that there is another side to the story.

 

[AC21091968]

There is an opinion piece in the Evening Standard coming from Natasha Mwansa (contributor the Evening Standard) who is a fan of the Sussexes, but is loosing patients over the clips of Oprah's interview she saw. Like some posters here, she finds it difficult to sympathise Harry & Meghan during this time of pandemic, where people have lost their job and affected by the lockdown. She was also against Meghan accusing “The Firm” of “perpetuating falsehoods”.

I’m a big Meghan fan — and even I’m losing patience
The Sussexes just can’t catch a break. In response to their upcoming interview with Oprah Winfrey, headlines are blaring, Twitter trolls are seething and Piers Morgan is frothing at the mouth. As the self-appointed chairwoman of the Meghan fan club, I always have and always will be rooting for her and Prince Harry. But for heaven’s sake, even I’m a bit tired of it all now.
https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/meghan-markle-oprah-interview-fan-b922431.html#

I have been late to this discussion on the recent clip that was released. I have to agree with most posters here that Meghan was not prepared or even suited for being a senior working royal. I posted on the Sussex News and Events thread that a person who is free-spirited with strong-mind will find a company that has rigorous and hard-hitting protocols/rules, very restrictive or frustrating. Sadly this is the case for Meghan when she was joining the Royal Family. Chelsy Davy and Cressida Bonas were mentioned on not wanting this restrictive protocol and live inside a fishbowl with less freedom, similar could be said for Ruthie Henshall (musical theatre actress).

BBC NEWS | Entertainment | Henshall talks of love for prince

 

[cathy50]

I do not know Oprah, but isn't she said to be a friend of Meghan? Is she or is she best friend to money and audience numbers (?). After all the mess those two brats manages to do to themselves will this interview be just another step in the same direction and not even a "friend" warned them, but used them?
Or will all this really work out in the US, which I consider H&M's plan (though sometimes doubting they have a plan yet acting like children), staying in the discussion, gaining publicity and making more money?
I mean after all the mess, one thinks they managed to get advisors, a team, a strategy???
I cannot help myself but still and even more and more think that they both have serious problems with their personalities plus not accepting as non-working royals no-one gives a sh.. about them?
Though I consider the Windsors being a strongly dysfunctional family, c'on a tell-all interview, accusing the other side.... out of the blue, while a global pandemic with hundred of thousands only in the US ! dying, what the hell are H&M thinking?
Except this forum,I did not read, listen or click anything else since months about them, because there's no other "power" I have. One day I hope monarchists will concentrate again on working families with some dignity left.
let's see if this is a big test, maybe they just sit down saying lovely things about the BRF and "proof" the press, this forum, and all their enemies being the really bad ones in the game, whatever they do, it's the wrong time, wrong place.... ok, this last suggestion is a desperate try to find something positive about yet another weird chapter with H&M ;-)

 

[Leopoldine]

I found that line to be telling. If she was told/advised/asked not to speak to Oprah alone, the comms team probably knew that Meghan and Oprah were not at all friends and also knew that Oprah had been asking for an interview.

The comms team was also probably aware of the aborted acquaintanceship with Piers Morgan. Like Oprah, he is a ubiquitous media presence. Now, he is just about the fiercest critic of Meghan. If I was the principal, I would definitely want my team in the room when speaking with Oprah.

 

[Marengo]

What we do not want is to have two parallel discussions between the same posters about exactly the same topics in two different threads.

We have hesitated to re-open the General News thread for that reason but on posters request it has been re-opened nonetheless.

Please make sure that you use that thread for all topics other than the Oprah interview and use this one when you want to discuss the Oprah-interview.

Several posts have been deleted. If you want to use the now deleted text for the General News thread you can contact me and I can send it to you by PM.

 

[Eskimo]

Here's an example of how I think she's shooting herself in the foot with this interview. She thinks she sounds reasonable by saying how restricted she was before, versus how liberated she now is to speak for herself. She doesn't sound reasonable at all actually because that's the deal when you become a working member of the BRF. That's the deal. She signed up to those restrictions, that protocol and that system without anyone forcing her. In return for the influential position and the huge privileges, you relinquish your right to voice an unvetted opinion for years until you reach the status of 'National Treasure' or become heir to the throne.

Yes, but she’s playing to an American audience who don’t know the restrictions on the members of the RF. They’ll just assume that Meghan was “silenced” because she’s biracial

 

[Erin9]

Yes, but she’s playing to an American audience who don’t know the restrictions on the members of the RF. They’ll just assume that Meghan was “silenced” because she’s biracial

Or the institution itself is the problem- archaic, backward, etc.

 

[Eskimo]

Or the institution itself is the problem- archaic, backward, etc.

The whole notion of a Royal Family is archaic and backward. You cannot modernize this notion without it ceasing to exist

 

[Erin9]

The whole notion of a Royal Family is archaic and backward. You cannot modernize this notion without it ceasing to exist

True. But- I suspect some viewers will walk out with the idea that Meghan was the victim of this horrible institution. She was a saint, and everything that went wrong was on someone else/the institution. (Not to go OT- but her Suits co- stars rant on Twitter is a good example of the takeaway I can see from some viewers.)

 

[Winnie]

Yes, but she’s playing to an American audience who don’t know the restrictions on the members of the RF. They’ll just assume that Meghan was “silenced” because she’s biracial

No we don't assume that Meghan was silenced because she was biracial. We assume that she knew she was to follow rules, just like any human that is being "paid" by any cooperation or firm. You don't follow the rules, you get told about your misconduct or fired. Simple. This woman got huge amounts of money for clothes [which she then sold and was against the rules] and became political, which also overstepped the rules. That is what Americans understand as they also follow these same rules in their everyday lives. Each company, cooperation or firm has policies that employees know and have signed to follow. Race has absolutely nothing to do with following rules. JMO

 

[ACO]

This video is making the rounds. SMH. It’s a shame royal correspondents would do this. It just proves some of what the Sussexes were saying.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1367974815206871040

 

[MaiaMia_53]

For a woman of the world, successful actress, philanthropist, wolrdwide public figure etc, as she was sold to us by her fans, you have to admit this is rather bizarre :
"I"m sorry, i didn't FULLY understand all the implications".
C'mon ...

Everyone is going to believe what they wish to believe and see what they wish to see regarding the Sussexes. I try to be open-minded and reflective, and fair. No one is perfect. But Meghan does not deserve the trolling, hate, constant critiques, and online bullying she has received. When a person falls deeply in love, even in their thirties, that is still young, no matter how accomplished and experienced a life Meghan led previously.

And frankly, although Meghan led a public life and she was fairly well-traveled, she was mainly focused on the circumscribed bubble of the acting world, which involved chiefly concentrating on auditions. Her humanitarian pursuits flourished once she became successful on Suits, when she had the time and money to branch out more. In one's 20s and early 30s, it is still a time of learning and growing. Entering the world of royalty was a completely new and different experience for Meghan, as it would be for anyone who didn't travel in aristocratic circles since childhood. Heck, royal life was even a steep learning curve for Diana, who was born into an aristocratic family, yet her early life was fairly sheltered, despite her father once having served as equerry to the Queen.

Furthermore, being in love makes a person see everything in a positive light and they eagerly want their relationship to work and they want to believe the best, despite any inkling of difficulties that might lie ahead with the loved one's family or any unusual circumstances. Meghan was honest in the S.A. interview that she blithely dismissed warnings about the U.K. press from her British friends because she had no deep knowledge or experience of British tabloid media having such an impact and presence in British cultural life, which is very different than tabloid media in the U.S.

 

[duchessrachel]

The thing I find most appalling about the whole Oprah interview, based upon the previews, is that Prince Harry, who I would assume knows the restrictions on the members of the RF, is complicit with her in her complaints. If he wasn't, he would not be doing the Oprah interview with her. No one made her marry into the family. She chose to. In the transcript from their engagement interview is the following snippet:

BBC: Do you have that sense of responsibility, Prince Harry, for what you are asking Meghan to do?

Prince Harry: Of course, that sense of responsibility was essentially from day one, or maybe a couple of months in, when I started to realize actually this is, I feel I know that I am in love with this girl and I hope that she is in love with me but we still have to sit down on the sofa. You know, I still have to have some pretty frank conversations with her to say what you are letting yourself in for it’s a big deal. It’s not easy for anybody. But I know at the end of the day, she chooses me and I choose her, and therefore whatever we have to tackle together or individually, it will always be us together as a team.

I wonder if he ever had those "pretty frank conversations" with her that he still needed to have at that point.

 

[Claire]

I believe that is why he will not be in that part of the interview _ essentially he is a high ranked member of the family that she is talking about. So not having him in the room separates him from having to say any thing . Also it gives him the opportunity to later say that he never made the allegations, it was Meghan.

Okay so it appears SS had a war plan for after the interview _ and the friends on twitter and there is a lot more will be coming the Windsor’s way. The Times article probably preempted that and it has started early. There is going to be a lot of mud slinging. There will be a lot on Twitter and in general weeks of this.
I must say that BP really need to come out with better evidence . As people tend to believe a single woman against an institution, and that is what Meghan’s whole plan revolves around. They need to release video or something really groundbreaking to break the cycle of the spin. Or SS will just continue their chipping away.
Meghan may have been contractual bound to do this interview and they couldn’t have gotten out of it. They have a lot invested in this interview, their Netflix, Spotify and Archwell foundation is build on them having first hand experience of bulling and mental health. You remove that now, and it collapses. If one smudge of evidence exists I would think the palace would release it, so I don’t think any is out there.
It is actually very common for the victims of bullying to be counter attached with allegations of bullying, ask any HR employer. It is just what happens which is why most bullying cases end in mediation. Which is why concrete evidence is needed , not testimonies by friends. Without it is is all allegation.