The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1381  
Old 04-23-2021, 08:54 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Scotland, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,048
I really struggle to understand some of the claims , the one about Meghan would need to find a job as there was no money, there are no words ..................
__________________

  #1382  
Old 04-23-2021, 08:56 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 8,451
Quote:
Originally Posted by camelot23ca View Post
While the “recollections may vary” part of the RF’s statement was the part that received the most attention, I thought the other part, which said something like, “we were sorry to hear just how unhappy The Sussexes were” was more subtle, but more revealing. At first glance it seems like sympathy, but it also clarified that the BRF didn’t see the tale of endless woe/mental breakdown Harry and Meghan described, either because Harry and Meghan didn’t show them or, just possibly, because there was no actual mental health crisis at the time.

I’d be interested in knowing when Meghan and Harry heard about the possibility of the bullying accusations, and BP’s response to them, being investigated. I wonder if there was an element of getting their cover story in place well before any damaging findings are released, (“she’s not a hypocritical bully, she’s a mentally ill victim of racism”).
I think that they are genuinely sorry that the 2 had a hard time.. but may be a bit skeptical as to how hard it really was. Perhaps the Sussexes didn't go into details about how depressed Meghan was, but just said they were both under stress, weren't able to cope, but in a non specific way. But I'm sure if they had told the queen or Charles that M was suicidal, the older royals would have insisted that she got help.
However looking at the bits I can remember from the last couple of years, I DO recollect those stories of them maybe going to Africa.. which I thought was just tabloid talk.. but if there were whispers leaking out into the press, it seems to me that the Royals WERE made aware of at least some of the problems and they WERE trying to find a solution for them, such as either saying "why dont you take up some work like running an estate and then in a few years, see if you want to keep on with that or if you do want to go into full time royal work" OR the idea that they might live privately in Africa for a time..
of course it seems like there were probably security issues over them living for long periods abroad.. and perhaps because of that, they had to abandon that plan.. but I think that overall, the Sussexes didn't take up any of the suggestions because they wanted a complete escape to LA/America for a portion of the year, not a quiet life managing an estate or even a quiet life in Africa....
__________________

  #1383  
Old 04-23-2021, 09:06 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Missouri, United States
Posts: 889
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alisa View Post
If the lines of communication was closed there was no way Charles could listen or hear the couple's possible solution. There are multiple sides to a story. Unfortunately all we have are Harry's and Meghan's and judgements are being made based on what they said in the interview.



The opposite Kensington Palace shot down and issued statements refuting hurtful stories in the press about the Cambridges. Meghan wasn't given the same treatment- instead the hurtful stories like her making Kate cry were allowed to perpetuate in the press.
But the lines of communication weren't closed. All they had to do was write a letter or an email. That's absolutely communication. Just because he decided that answering the phone wasn't beneficial doesn't mean that they couldn't communicate with him. It simply means that they had to use a different method of communication. And I'm very, very sure that if he didn't agree and acquiesce to their "possible solution" then it would be taken by them as being unheard or not listened to and since they know he can't and won't respond publicly, well, why not just tell the world that he didn't listen and wouldn't hear them?

As for the silly little crying story...my goodness. How ridiculously thin-skinned can one be? Especially one who was supposedly a "very successful actress" who was supposed to know exactly how these things worked? KP, like any royal offices including BP and CH, make decisions about commenting on things based on whether or not there's good reason to comment. If they chose not to comment because, really, why give a ridiculous story like that legs to grow and spread on when it was really a non-starter at best, then clearly they were watching public reaction to the story and saw that it was very much along the lines of "eh, hormonal post-birth mother with two other small children and stressed out bride...all to be expected and not a big deal" rather than the "everyone hates me because they think I made St. Catherine cry" mess that Meghan likes to claim it was.
  #1384  
Old 04-23-2021, 09:08 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: N/A, Bulgaria
Posts: 259
Archie is such a sweet boy! So big now!


But yes, I'm rather sceptical it was just a paparazzi sighting. I've been waiting for something to emerge right on Louis' birthday because there has been a pattern. Coincidence? Perhaps. But I don't think so.


And even if it was a coincidence, the difference is striking. Harry and Meghan supposedly ran away from cameras and such, yet their child is getting his photo taken in the most casual of circumstances while HRH Prince Louis of Cambridge, in the midst of evil media interest, gets his casual photo taken by his mother. Harry and Meghan did miscalculate if their children's privacy was one of their major reasons for leaving.
  #1385  
Old 04-23-2021, 09:13 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Missouri, United States
Posts: 889
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moran View Post
But yes, I'm rather sceptical it was just a paparazzi sighting. I've been waiting for something to emerge right on Louis' birthday because there has been a pattern. Coincidence? Perhaps. But I don't think so.
Precisely. Any truly good PR firm knows the value of not being so obvious so I'm truly baffled why Sunshine Sachs is making the big money. Good PR firms know that making something look unintentional, uncalculated, and coincidental is important for the long run. If everyone can see through the facade and even comes to expect the "leaks" on certain days and in a certain pattern, it definitely loses some of it's value. At this point it's entirely predictable and even expected that Harry and Meghan and family will be pictured or release "news" any time there's a birthday, anniversary, or important event for that big, bad, mean bunch of Brits across the pond. Another poster earlier on said it well...once or twice is simply coincidence or bad timing. At this point, it's a fully expected pattern.
  #1386  
Old 04-23-2021, 09:16 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Somewhere, United States
Posts: 1,780
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavs View Post
It's entirely silly but they're trying to go the "William/Charles =Bad" "Queen=Good" route because they need the glamour and connection of/to the BRF to succeed. That's why they want to keep using their titles, that's a big reason they want two children who are going to grow up out of the "toxic, trapped" environment in progressive California to be HRH Prince/ss.



As if HM wasn't the still active and working head of everything that they trashed but some sweet lady who's completely separate from it and just happens to be the most famous woman in the world who everyone has some respect/affection for. And now suddenly Meghan and Philip were very, very close as well.



Some of the Sussex Squad are confused as anything about the glowing Meghan and Philip stories given his reputation and their previous "tear it down" attitude. So the dissonance is striking and noticed.



IIRC William donated his Air Ambulance salary to charity. It seems from all sides that there were options for Harry and Meghan to take it slowly although the "she'll have to work" comment seems to have been taken badly by Harry. But once they were in and working they couldn't go and make money off their "brand" part time. If they wanted to retrain as doctors or teachers and do the occasional royal duty or go and be organic, vegan farmers in the Cotswolds that would be a different story.


Silly is a good word for what seems to be their current narrative. There does seem to be a rather obvious effort to suddenly make clear: Meghan was very close to Philip- THE closest person to her IIRC. Now, she’s very close to the Queen. It’s like....the interview never happened. Yeah....okay. William/Charles- not good. Well- they’d better enjoy this while they can. If HM is all they have....that is going to be, well, limited.

Petty is another word that comes to mind. (IDK if that photo of Meghan and Archie yesterday was coincidental or not....but what a coincidence is all I can say if indeed it was. If it was calculated, I just want to roll my eyes at how utterly childish this all is.)

I think there were- and are- possibilities for HIHO to work very very well. It might truly be something for Charlotte and Louis. But- when your “work” is making money off your royal brand...that won’t work IMO. It needs to be something more like William’s earlier job. What Beatrice and Eugenie do would work IMO. They just couldn’t make money off their brand...which is what they wanted and, best I can tell, all they’re doing now.
  #1387  
Old 04-23-2021, 09:19 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 8,451
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hallo girl View Post
I really struggle to understand some of the claims , the one about Meghan would need to find a job as there was no money, there are no words ..................
yeah that is a REALLY Weird remark. Surely noone said to Harry, "Sorry but if you marry this woman, she'll have to go to work because there is no money to keep her." I mean come on?
Was there some context? Perhaps they were told that if she was living with H during her engagement, she would share his PPOs but would not have them on her own.. and perhaps someone made a joke to the effect that she'd have to pay herself, go out and earn the money... Its far fetched but the only way that I can see something being said that might vaguely sound like "she'll have to work"...
  #1388  
Old 04-23-2021, 09:25 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
However looking at the bits I can remember from the last couple of years, I DO recollect those stories of them maybe going to Africa.. which I thought was just tabloid talk.. but if there were whispers leaking out into the press, it seems to me that the Royals WERE made aware of at least some of the problems and they WERE trying to find a solution for them, such as either saying "why dont you take up some work like running an estate and then in a few years, see if you want to keep on with that or if you do want to go into full time royal work" OR the idea that they might live privately in Africa for a time....
To me there’s no question the RF was aware there were problems. They knew that Meghan and Harry wanted to do things their way. At least some of them knew there were problems with multiple staff members. They knew there problems and conflict, but they may have felt Meghan and Harry were at least as much the instigators as they were the victims.

If the options that have been publicly discussed are accurate, they sound like the sorts of offers you make to people who are both having and causing difficulties, as a way to help everyone involved, in this case The Sussexes, yes, but also the other family members and, maybe most of all, the staff. Meghan continuing to work, running an estate, taking a sabbatical abroad, etc, are all reasonable possibilities to bring up as a response to complaints about money, the press, wanting to do things differently or not being satisfied with traditional royal life.

The offer that wasn’t going to be made was, “we’re going to give you complete freedom to do whatever you want, and whatever that is, we’ll fund it entirely and indefinitely!”
  #1389  
Old 04-23-2021, 09:25 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Missouri, United States
Posts: 889
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
yeah that is a REALLY Weird remark. Surely noone said to Harry, "Sorry but if you marry this woman, she'll have to go to work because there is no money to keep her." I mean come on?
Was there some context? Perhaps they were told that if she was living with H during her engagement, she would share his PPOs but would not have them on her own.. and perhaps someone made a joke to the effect that she'd have to pay herself, go out and earn the money... Its far fetched but the only way that I can see something being said that might vaguely sound like "she'll have to work"...
You know, I've been kind of puzzling over that whole statement and couldn't really make heads or tails of it but this is actually a really good idea. We know that the Cambridges lived together before they were married and it was really not at all an inconceivable notion that Harry and Meghan would as well. I can absolutely see a statement to the effect of "sure it's fine for her to live with you but she won't be on royal duties, etc. until you're actually married so she might want to keep working through that period." That hadn't occurred to me as the catalyst for their statement until just now but it does make a lot of sense.
  #1390  
Old 04-23-2021, 09:27 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 8,451
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erin9 View Post
Silly is a good word for what seems to be their current narrative. There does seem to be a rather obvious effort to suddenly make clear: Meghan was very close to Philip- THE closest person to her IIRC. Now, she’s very close to the Queen. It’s like....the interview never happened. Yeah....okay. William/Charles- not good. Well- they’d better enjoy this while they can. If HM is all they have....that is going to be, well, limited.

I think there were- and are- possibilities for HIHO to work very very well. It might truly be something for Charlotte and Louis. But- when your “work” is making money off your royal brand...that won’t work IMO. It needs to be something more like William’s earlier job. What Beatrice and Eugenie do would work IMO. They just couldn’t make money off their brand...which is what they wanted and, best I can tell, all they’re doing now.
But Euge and Beatrice are not half in and half out. They do some charity work but it is not on behalf of the queen, it is something they undertake as private members of the RF..
And yes they have ordinary jobs, they are not going places and doing deals with companies as Princesses..
Harry and Meghan were "IN", at first. They got their money from C and the Sov Grant. They got work that was allocated to them as reps for the queen.. and they were meant to be full time at the job.
But I'm sure if they'd said "we want some private time, like Will and K had, for a few years", the queen would have been OK iwht that, and they could have taken up some other work.. or no work at all but there would have been restrictions on what they did.. Naked profiteering would be frowned on. But if they wanted a quiet life, with Harry continuing with his Invictus and service charities and him and Meg having their family, I think the queen would have been Ok with that for 2 or 3 years.
  #1391  
Old 04-23-2021, 09:27 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Scotland, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
yeah that is a REALLY Weird remark. Surely noone said to Harry, "Sorry but if you marry this woman, she'll have to go to work because there is no money to keep her." I mean come on?
Was there some context? Perhaps they were told that if she was living with H during her engagement, she would share his PPOs but would not have them on her own.. and perhaps someone made a joke to the effect that she'd have to pay herself, go out and earn the money... Its far fetched but the only way that I can see something being said that might vaguely sound like "she'll have to work"...
That sums everything up, no context to anything that was said and Oprah didn't try to establish any.
I just do not believe that Meghan was told there was no money to keep her and she would need to work, there is more to that, either a joke about the expensive dresses, or an option to continue working if she wished.
Or were they demanding more than Charles and the Queen were prepared to provide ,which would not have been sweet money.
I do not know, but even then did a staff or family member say it, I cannot recall if that was made clear, why should it nothing else was clear.
  #1392  
Old 04-23-2021, 09:29 AM
Royalist.in.NC's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: Asheville, United States
Posts: 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by camelot23ca View Post
While the “recollections may vary” part of the RF’s statement was the part that received the most attention, I thought the other part, which said something like, “we were sorry to hear just how unhappy The Sussexes were” was more subtle, but more revealing. At first glance it seems like sympathy, but it also clarified that the BRF didn’t see the tale of endless woe/mental breakdown Harry and Meghan described, either because Harry and Meghan didn’t show them or, just possibly, because there was no actual mental health crisis at the time.

I’d be interested in knowing when Meghan and Harry heard about the possibility of the bullying accusations, and BP’s response to them, being investigated. I wonder if there was an element of getting their cover story in place well before any damaging findings are released, (“she’s not a hypocritical bully, she’s a mentally ill victim of racism”).
This is a really great point about timing if they were concerned that the “Meghan bullied staff” info might come out first.

The mental health stuff: I’ve said this way back but to add my 2 cents yet again. As a counselor I’ve done many suicide and other assessments. The bottom line is “are you a danger to yourself or others?” Any doctor would have taken that very seriously, gotten her an immediate assessment, and if the mental health professional believed she was at risk, she would have been hospitalized. The RF could easily spin why she wasn’t making appearances.

With the therapy that Harry has had, with his work in mental health with William, it is unfathomable that he didn’t know what to do. As others have said OB’s are very in tuned with mental health issues due to the numbers of women who have postpartum depression. I am not at all questioning that she was depressed and suicidal. But I do not believe Harry didn’t know what to do nor have resources. Instead of going to wherever they went that night, Harry should have called her doctor. They framed it as “brave Meghan, soldiering on when she was suicidal.” Why on earth didn’t they stay home and call her (or Harry’s) doctor? Honestly, any other response makes me question their truthfulness as well as their common sense.
  #1393  
Old 04-23-2021, 09:31 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,406
Scobie in his Harper's article made it absolutely clear that contrary to other reports Harry "had not written a heartfelt letter to his father" before the funeral. He didn't say Harry "couldn't" or Charles sent it back, just that Harry didn't. That was a line of communication that was open but they made it clear that he didn't use it and Scobie also made it clear that Harry didn't have any sort of reconciliation with his father or brother despite some cautious optimism "but there's a long way to go" from other sources.

He did however assure everyone that Harry met the Queen alone twice and Meghan and Archie talk with her all the time.

There are lines of communication that are open but the only ones the Sussexes are apparently interested in pursuing and then immediately publicising (and making it harder for HM to talk about anything that actually matters) is The Queen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moran View Post
Archie is such a sweet boy! So big now!


But yes, I'm rather sceptical it was just a paparazzi sighting. I've been waiting for something to emerge right on Louis' birthday because there has been a pattern. Coincidence? Perhaps. But I don't think so.


And even if it was a coincidence, the difference is striking. Harry and Meghan supposedly ran away from cameras and such, yet their child is getting his photo taken in the most casual of circumstances while HRH Prince Louis of Cambridge, in the midst of evil media interest, gets his casual photo taken by his mother. Harry and Meghan did miscalculate if their children's privacy was one of their major reasons for leaving.
He is adorable.

I think it was a set up. Page Six has not been issued with a takedown notice or Scobie/Gayle/Janina complaining about it yet. On the contrary. The agency credited is one that is well known for setting up and distributing photos celebrities want out there. There have been reports of the Sussexes being seen in and around Montecito for weeks but not even any phone snaps, and then... it was literally released minutes before they knew the print deadline for Louis's picture was.

Can't wait to see what big news they have on the 29th.


There are plenty of other hurtful stories that came out around the same time as the "Meghan Made Kate Cry" one. Tiaragate for example or "why did people care what I did for my private baby shower in NYC?" . Why did Meghan choose *this one* to complain about on TV even though she also said Kate had "owned it and apologised". Going on and on about such a petty story years after it happened when both had very good reasons for being emotional (and Meghan's own mental health whilst pregnant and post partum should give her more of an idea now how Kate could have felt if she was truly compassionate). She could have just claimed the whole thing was lies as Finding Freedom did.

The Sussexes are currently running into the problem of they've issued so many denials and lawsuits against the media that when they *don't* immediately do that people think it's true or that they're the ones leaking it. Which is what BP were telling them all along.
  #1394  
Old 04-23-2021, 09:34 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 8,451
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Heather_ View Post
You know, I've been kind of puzzling over that whole statement and couldn't really make heads or tails of it but this is actually a really good idea. We know that the Cambridges lived together before they were married and it was really not at all an inconceivable notion that Harry and Meghan would as well. I can absolutely see a statement to the effect of "sure it's fine for her to live with you but she won't be on royal duties, etc. until you're actually married so she might want to keep working through that period." That hadn't occurred to me as the catalyst for their statement until just now but it does make a lot of sense.
I suppose, the difference being though that Kate was in the UK..and she more or less lived with Will for a couple of years.
But Meg didn't come here till she was engaged to harry and she would have had to start afresh with finding work... so Id be surprised if the RF/Met thought of her as "being H's fiancee but going off to work every day"...
  #1395  
Old 04-23-2021, 09:41 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Missouri, United States
Posts: 889
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
I suppose, the difference being though that Kate was in the UK..and she more or less lived with Will for a couple of years.
But Meg didn't come here till she was engaged to harry and she would have had to start afresh with finding work... so Id be surprised if the RF/Met thought of her as "being H's fiancee but going off to work every day"...
Sorry, I guess I should clarify. I meant that while they'd have been fine with her living with Harry before their marriage, they may have wondered instead if she'd rather keep on working. Not a living with him while continuing to work but more a "sure that's fine if she wants to but since she won't have duties until after the wedding maybe she'd rather keep working" kind of thing. I'm not terribly articulate or clear before my second cup of coffee in the mornings.
  #1396  
Old 04-23-2021, 09:45 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erin9 View Post
I think there were- and are- possibilities for HIHO to work very very well. It might truly be something for Charlotte and Louis. But- when your “work” is making money off your royal brand...that won’t work IMO. It needs to be something more like William’s earlier job. What Beatrice and Eugenie do would work IMO. They just couldn’t make money off their brand...which is what they wanted and, best I can tell, all they’re doing now.
It would work with no problem as long as everyone agrees to certain ground rules. As you say, William has already done it. Half in/half out, of a sort, has been done multiple times in the past with royals and the military, and this may have been what was originally planned for Harry. There are various situations that could be made to work, but only if everyone understands that if there’s a conflict between the Royal Family and whatever the “half out” piece is, the RF takes precedence, and it is the BRF and its advisors, NOT the individual royal, that decides what constitutes a conflict.
  #1397  
Old 04-23-2021, 09:47 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,406
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Heather_ View Post
You know, I've been kind of puzzling over that whole statement and couldn't really make heads or tails of it but this is actually a really good idea. We know that the Cambridges lived together before they were married and it was really not at all an inconceivable notion that Harry and Meghan would as well. I can absolutely see a statement to the effect of "sure it's fine for her to live with you but she won't be on royal duties, etc. until you're actually married so she might want to keep working through that period." That hadn't occurred to me as the catalyst for their statement until just now but it does make a lot of sense.
That makes more sense than "we can't afford to keep Harry's wife as a working royal". But then he knew that from Kate, his mother and every other married in in the family.

Although we've come to see that whilst Harry doesn't seem to have a clear idea of how the real world works he also doesn't seem to have an understanding of how the royal world works either. Or he's just making up whatever sounds good.

I think there were discussions about if Meghan *wanted* to keep working at first or wanted a gradual ease in whilst they had kids and she got used to the country and the role after a whirlwind romance but we know how that went. Maybe Harry was insulted that people didn't seem 100% convinced Meghan would immediately fit The Firm perfectly?

Quote:
Originally Posted by camelot23ca View Post
While the “recollections may vary” part of the RF’s statement was the part that received the most attention, I thought the other part, which said something like, “we were sorry to hear just how unhappy The Sussexes were” was more subtle, but more revealing. At first glance it seems like sympathy, but it also clarified that the BRF didn’t see the tale of endless woe/mental breakdown Harry and Meghan described, either because Harry and Meghan didn’t show them or, just possibly, because there was no actual mental health crisis at the time.

I’d be interested in knowing when Meghan and Harry heard about the possibility of the bullying accusations, and BP’s response to them, being investigated. I wonder if there was an element of getting their cover story in place well before any damaging findings are released, (“she’s not a hypocritical bully, she’s a mentally ill victim of racism”).
There is some thought that:

A) The ending of the privacy lawsuits gave staff an opportunity to put in their complaints because they weren't going to be called to the stand.

B) That they heard about the interview and wanted to get *their* version in there with HR/The Times before it in case Meghan and Harry blamed everything on "the men in grey". Who were actually quite a few women who were not lifelong courtiers. So it didn't look like revenge filing.

The "The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan." is definitely discreet speak for "they didn't tell us all this at the time" make ideas of why that is yourself.
  #1398  
Old 04-23-2021, 10:00 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 8,451
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Heather_ View Post
Sorry, I guess I should clarify. I meant that while they'd have been fine with her living with Harry before their marriage, they may have wondered instead if she'd rather keep on working. Not a living with him while continuing to work but more a "sure that's fine if she wants to but since she won't have duties until after the wedding maybe she'd rather keep working" kind of thing. I'm not terribly articulate or clear before my second cup of coffee in the mornings.
Thanks. I dont suppose we'll ever get a clear answere about so many of the things that were said, that didn't make a lot of sense...
  #1399  
Old 04-23-2021, 10:13 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: N/A, Bulgaria
Posts: 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Heather_ View Post
Precisely. Any truly good PR firm knows the value of not being so obvious so I'm truly baffled why Sunshine Sachs is making the big money. Good PR firms know that making something look unintentional, uncalculated, and coincidental is important for the long run. If everyone can see through the facade and even comes to expect the "leaks" on certain days and in a certain pattern, it definitely loses some of it's value. At this point it's entirely predictable and even expected that Harry and Meghan and family will be pictured or release "news" any time there's a birthday, anniversary, or important event for that big, bad, mean bunch of Brits across the pond. Another poster earlier on said it well...once or twice is simply coincidence or bad timing. At this point, it's a fully expected pattern.
Perhaps Sunshine Sachs has little say in how the couple approach things. God knows that they knew better than the RF's employees. I can only guess they know better than Sunshine Sachs as well because it's so obvious, I can't really fathom how any agency operating like this would last more than a year...
  #1400  
Old 04-23-2021, 10:19 AM
Queen Ester's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by camelot23ca View Post
While the “recollections may vary” part of the RF’s statement was the part that received the most attention, I thought the other part, which said something like, “we were sorry to hear just how unhappy The Sussexes were” was more subtle, but more revealing. At first glance it seems like sympathy, but it also clarified that the BRF didn’t see the tale of endless woe/mental breakdown Harry and Meghan described, either because Harry and Meghan didn’t show them or, just possibly, because there was no actual mental health crisis at the time.

I’d be interested in knowing when Meghan and Harry heard about the possibility of the bullying accusations, and BP’s response to them, being investigated. I wonder if there was an element of getting their cover story in place well before any damaging findings are released, (“she’s not a hypocritical bully, she’s a mentally ill victim of racism”).
You have to admit though, that their American PR team is doing a good job, people are buying into this narrative.
__________________

Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Duke & Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 3: March - April 2021 Jacknch Current Events Archive 2203 04-06-2021 12:08 PM




Popular Tags
#royalrelatives #royalgenes abu dhabi american american history ancestry baby names britannia british royal family british royals brownbitcoinqueen buckingham palace camilla's family camilla parker bowles canada carolin china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing clarence house cpr dresses duchess of sussex duke of sussex earl of snowdon edward vii emperor family tree general news thread george vi gradenigo hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume history hochberg house of windsor hypothetical monarchs jewellery jewelry kensington palace list of rulers maxima monarchy mountbatten names nepal nepalese royal family pless prince charles of luxembourg prince harry princess alexia (2005 -) princess chulabhorn princess dita princess eugenie princess laurentien princess of orange queen elizabeth ii queen louise queen victoria resusci anne royal court royal jewels royalty of taiwan russian court dress spain stuart thailand thai royal family unfinished portrait united states united states of america wales welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:28 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×