The Duchess of Sussex: Family and Background


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
That's true of any real investigative journalist and I agree that none of Meghan's e(strange)d family would be able to stand a real journalist separating the wheat from the chaff in what these people spout out of their mouths.

They're playing to the tabloids that thrive on circus sideshows and leave real journalism to the professionals. Tabloid reporters don't check facts such as to when Facebook shares went public but print it anyways. We, here, have seen it debunked just by people that have common sense.

I think its a good idea to keep the caliber of the press that are thriving on these stories presented by the Markles and my grandmother's wise saying comes into play here. Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear. :D
 
You don't have to like or dislike her. It just not into downplaying stuff she did because people are convinced she spent her life trying to bag a prince. She was involved in a lot of charity work for years. It had nothing to do with Harry. Her volunteering at the food banks and organizing the left over craft services from her set to be sent to shelters wasn't some grand scheme to grab the attention of the royal family 4 years before she met Harry.

Also I don't think anyone is claiming she was some A list actress but she was on a hit and long running show. A show that is still airing and likely she would still be on. Actors evolve. She clearly was pursuing other avenues. Who knows what her next plan would have been. She was very, very close to with the head of NBC Universal. She knew a lot of producers and directors. That comes in handy when looking for work. It wouldn't have been unrealistic for her to land another show. Example: Her good friend Abigail went from Suits to Timeless and just announced a new show. It is about who you know.

So yes her walking away from something she worked a long time to get is hard. I don't think she has regrets because she has gained a lot but Meghan also sacrificed plenty.

Exactly! :flowers: Well said. I don't think it is fully appreciated how hard it is to make it in this business, and to get as far as Meghan got. Also, Meghan did it without any tabloid stunts. None. That's impressive and tells me a lot about who she is.

My BA and MA degrees are in communications. I'm falling on deaf ears here, but it's obvious. I don't doubt she had done charity in the past, but it REALLY got publicised once she dated him. She was an actress with a team. Yes, she just down social media, but that doesn't mean her PR team wasn't working and leaking. I'll bow out now. If you've been in the PR biz, you can recognize it. As I've said before, I don't dislike her, but you can see it.

How is it 'obvious'? I think the questions asked were valid. :cool: Would still like you to explain what you saw as 'obvious'. I've been around PR to some little extent (by no means do I know all the ins and outs as you must) and what I saw was Meghan fulfilling already established gigs (connected to Suits) but she otherwise completely shut down all other PR events. I would also question if someone at her level has a 'team' handling PR. Her agent, maybe a publicist, but mainly it would have been Meghan calling the shots. (She would have been under the umbrella of the Suits PR team always with an eye to the show).
 
Last edited:
Regarding these tabloid articles, now one with the uncle: keep in mind how oily-salesman-like these tabloid types are. :cool: They really do 'seduce' unsuspecting interviewees to say stuff that they can then twist to make out that something else was meant. It really does happen that way. This is not Walter Cronkite sitting down to allow the interviewee to 'get their story told'. Not at all. It's to get enough material to be able to support the dramatic spin, not 'the truth so help me God'.

I will quote from Wikipedia regarding the Loaded Question:
"A loaded question, or the complex question fallacy, is a question that contains a controversial or unjustified assumption (e.g., a presumption of guilt). Aside from being an informal fallacy depending on usage, such questions may be used as a rhetorical tool: the question attempts to limit direct replies to be those that serve the questioner's agenda. The traditional example is the question "Have you stopped beating your wife?" Whether the respondent answers yes or no, he will admit to having a wife and having beaten her at some time in the past. Thus, these facts are presupposed by the question, and in this case an entrapment, because it narrows the respondent to a single answer, and the fallacy of many questions has been committed. The fallacy relies upon context for its effect."

I would not take anything the tabloids report anyone saying as legit, especially in this faux 'news' cycle. JMO.
 
Last edited:
Tom, he states in the DM article that he paid for his share of the cost of Meghan's first wedding by selling Facebook shares. The wedding was in September 2011. Facebook didn't become a public company until mid-2012!

So, Tom, a bald faced lie, huh, unless the fiction-based Fail made that comment up. Samantha in one of her Tweets months ago stated categorically that none of the Markles went to the first wedding, and it's odd that Tom has no photos to share of the occasion. Also, a nice posed photo there of Tom, in a Mexican pharmacy.
He’s been quoted. The paper could be sued if they made it all up.
His lies just keep tallying up...
 
:previous: ... and the interviews just keep on coming. its been stated that the only reason for this latest interview is because he wants to clear up lies and tall tales that have appeared in the press about him. He's on the tabloid merry-go-round and the more he opens his mouth, the more the tabloids have to work with and stretch what he says, exaggerate things and all to the advantage of the tabloids who know that by doing this, they're egging Tom, Sr. on to rant more and more. They got the man exactly where they want him.

Daddy dearest just cannot see this and Samantha would sell him out for a few more green dollars. This is a mess that they've created all by themselves and nothing that they say or do will ever "set things straight".

Tom, Sr.'s credibility rating is spiraling towards a 0% rating to be believed. Sam's already there and heading into the negative numbers. :D
 
Does anyone think Tom might have attended Meghan first wedding ceremony with Trevor which took place on the 16th August 2011, prior to the Jamaican one.
How many weding ceremonies did she have?
 
From what I understand, Trevor and Meghan had a civil ceremony in California and then had a wedding ceremony/reception in Jamaica with family and friends. I could be totally wrong on this but its what I remember reading somewhere.
 
“The newlyweds, who are said to be waiting for the 74 year old to approach them in a 'respectful manner', will not try to 'set the record straight', reports the Sunday Times.”

“The only reason Meghan hasn't spoken to her father yet is because she's yet to hear from him in a respectful manner,' a source told DailyMail.com earlier this week”

Prince Harry and Meghan 'are not going to engage' in war of words with her father | Daily Mail Online

So this suggests that once he calms down, they will probably meet with him, or at least make contact.

Provided the story is true.
 
At the moment TM is fairly harmless. I imagine he would be a lot worse if he were a keyboard warrior with a twitter account.
 
Barring Mrs Ragland, the Markles [as a 'Family'] have done NOTHING to recommend themselves to the British or Commonwealth Public's, nor helped THEIR family member in ANY way whatsoever.
It gives me no satisfaction to say it, but 'there it is'..
 
The tabloids are jerking Dad around and he is too vain to see it. One story makes him sympathetic; the next day he is a liar and a villain. "Journalists" like Piers Morgan are using him too for their own agendas and they will throw him away or destroy him when Dad no longer serves their purposes. Meghan sees what the press is doing which is why she is not going after him in the media, BUT Dad turned down help from the palace. He brought this on himself. No one forced him to do these slam interviews so he needs to take responsibility for the public perceptions of him. Any public statements with details from Meghan will not end it, it will prolong it more.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Barring Mrs Ragland, the Markles [as a 'Family'] have done NOTHING to recommend themselves to the British or Commonwealth Public's, nor helped THEIR family member in ANY way whatsoever.
It gives me no satisfaction to say it, but 'there it is'..

I don't suppose they care, at least the siblings obviously don't. They clearly dislike Meghan very much....
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Barring Mrs Ragland, the Markles [as a 'Family'] have done NOTHING to recommend themselves to the British or Commonwealth Public's, nor helped THEIR family member in ANY way whatsoever.
It gives me no satisfaction to say it, but 'there it is'..

But Mr Markle has been fairly ‘harmless’ so far according to some :ermm: The overall abusive nature means nothing. His proven lies, the constant inconsistencies/contradictions in his never-ending interviews, denigrating Meghan, dragging her mum through the mud, repeatedly insulting Meghan’s in-laws, revealing Harry’s private discussions (that Markle likely fabricated anyway given his track record )... I mean it’s all just child’s play isn’t it? The distress caused to the newlyweds is nothing :ermm:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You are quite right Lady Reem I used a poor choice of words there. However, i did mean it in a different context. I do have trouble trying to express myself properly at times.
 
Thomas Markle courts media attention, TMZ revealed he contacted them. Instead of letting his daughter & the palace handle things he decided to make the week leading up to the wedding all about him. He literally hijacked the lead up to his daughter’s wedding. How self-centred can one person be, especially after his paparazzi scam debacle?

And that GMB live interview Markle gave not that long ago, he actually volunteered information on Harry’s political views, he wasn’t prompted or asked about it before he opened his greedy mouth for which he received payment. So no, this man is not a kid who’s been exploited as much as some would have people believe that to be the case. I happen to think that man is just incredibly spiteful and self-serving.
 
Last edited:
Tom Snr has talked too much and has contradicted himself many times. It is hard to take this man seriously or feel bad for him. He is an egomaniac lashing out and will continue to do it as long as he feels slighted. He wants them to react to him. He has said it more than once now. They refuse.

I don't see it calming down on the Markles end but come next month the press will have other things to focus on. That will likely frustrate the Markles more once they realize that this "silly season" was their moment but once the royals resume their activities they will become old news.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
He’s been quoted. The paper could be sued if they made it all up.
His lies just keep tallying up...

Do you know what $$ it would cost Tom Markle Sr to sue one of the tabloids for one or two things they’ve written that might not be true? His pockets are not that deep.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You are quite right Lady Reem I used a poor choice of words there. However, i did mean it in a different context. I do have trouble trying to express myself properly at times.
I meant in general and not you personally.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I really feel bad for Meghan for having to go though this. I know it must be hurtful and downright embarrassing to her on having a parent that has diarrhea of the mouth.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've said here before that IMO, with blabbermouth relatives, you really cannot have a full relationship and that whatever you say, these relatives will leverage that to make you look bad.

That said, I do believe in compassion and forgiveness within limits.

The healthy and assertive way to deal with this would be to meet face to face, on neutral territory and to unemotionally say that you only want a private relationship. And that you will only have a relationship if it remains private. That mutual respect for one another's privacy is the only way forward.

Of course, you have to be willing to face the fallout if the other person decides to publicly spin/lie about this conversation. And it would help if it were facilitated by a professional counselor.

I'm not saying that would work, or that it should be tried with all the Markles. But I just learned that a not-beloved relative is ill and I, myself am rethinking the well-earned frost between us.
 
Rumors of a reality show with three elderly adults without any proper jobs accept lying about a person two of the elderly adults have not spoken to in years. The three elderly adults currently live in different locations so unlike other reality families they don't have their own homes or outside interests. Sounds like the person starting the rumor that newspapers report as truth is just trying to get more attention.
 
A number of posts have been deleted. This is the second time this week that we've had to delete posts that speculated about whether Thomas Sr. is a security threat and whether he would physically harm Meghan (or anyone in the BRF). This type of speculation is not acceptable.

As stated in the last mod note, continued disregard of moderator warnings and requests will see posting privileges suspended for repeat offenders.
 
Last edited:
Rumors of a reality show with three elderly adults without any proper jobs accept lying about a person two of the elderly adults have not spoken to in years. The three elderly adults currently live in different locations so unlike other reality families they don't have their own homes or outside interests. Sounds like the person starting the rumor that newspapers report as truth is just trying to get more attention.

You must be very young! Samantha and Markle Jr. are not actually elderly. But this does sound like the worst show ever!
 
You must be very young! Samantha and Markle Jr. are not actually elderly. But this does sound like the worst show ever!

yeah I was wondering who these elderly people were.. Meg is only 37 and Im guessing the other 2 cant' be more than 50
 
Samantha is 17 years older than Meghan but she is not elderly. Thomas Sr? Yes.
 
Samantha is 17 years older than Meghan but she is not elderly. Thomas Sr? Yes.


Either way in terms of TV anyone older than 40 is elderly. I'm not sure what type of demographic the show will aim for. Shows like Honey Boo Boo feature fairly young people who actually live together as a family. The Kardashians are also young and actually live together in one place. Reality shows also feature characters who have some kind of character. Neither of the members of that family have any real personality, or talent unless you count flip flopping and lying.
 
Attractiveness is also a factor to get people to watch the show. Even when they clean up for the paid interviews Sam, Jr and Sr are not jaw droppers. Wit, intelligence and personality are needed and they come up short in all three.

To show a lack of brains, the Markles are not noticing the content of the media "defense" of Dad:

Has any of the apologists said Dad deserves to have a coat of arms? No.

Have any of them said Dad should have full access to royal property? No.

Have any of them said Dad and the family should be invited to Royal Ascot, Wimbledon, Balmoral, Sandringham? No.

Have any of them said Dad should have access to future royal grandchildren?
No.

Have any of them argued the Markles should enjoy all the royal in law perks like others in the BRF? NO.

And there lies the true feelings of the media defenders of the Markles. Classless poor relations looking for a big score. The establishment goes after Harry and Meghan and KP for not bringing Dad in, which translates to you knew this guy was a problem so you should have got to him early and bought him off. The same for the half sibs, cut them checks and ship them back to Florida, Oregon and Mexico after the wedding. They don't deserve to enjoy the benefits of being royal adjacent in their view. But the Markles deserve the overt and covert contempt that is heaped on them.
 
Last edited:
Eh. I can name many of actors who would disagree with the 40+ is elderly in terms of film/tv. Heck many people hit their peak of role when they hit that 35-45 range. No one calling JLo or Angela Basset elderly.

That said I agree with the idea of Markles on some reality show. They literally have nothing to sell except their hate and frustration of Meghan's new life. That is literally it.
 
Attractiveness is also a factor to get people to watch the show. Even when they clean up for the paid interviews Sam, Jr and Sr are not jaw droppers. Wit, intelligence and personality are needed and they come up short in all three.




the son can feature his drinking and abusive relationship which in the age of #me too will not be a highlight.


the daughter can highlight her three children that she has not contact with and uses social media to bully her daughter who is 18.


the father leads an exciting social life in Mexico with a friend who is on meth.


Whoever produces this motley crew will have to finance the housing, transportation as well as insurance and bail money. Most reality shows are cheap to produce because they are somewhat real.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom