Harry and Meghan - OP updated with Threadbanned Users 4/5/21

ceadaoin.

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

He will indeed. The secret to old Liz's success is that she never ever says anything to anyone.

"Never complain, never explain". It's never failed her really has it?

retro:electro

She’s dead right. The more you pander to nonsense the more nonsense will occur.

retro:electro

Future Queen



Drama Queen



:pac:

MoonUnit75

retro:electro wrote: »

She’s dead right. The more you pander to nonsense the more nonsense will occur.

And, predictably, their chat with Oprah has backfired. Their popularity in the UK and now in the US has gone down instead of up. https://www.thenationalnews.com/world/europe/harry-and-meghan-lose-support-in-us-after-oprah-interview-poll-finds-1.1187446

Sounds like they will need a new Head of Public Adoration.

Be right back

Happy families indeed.

Topgear on Dave

ceadaoin. wrote: »

"Never complain, never explain". It's never failed her really has it?

Nope. Once the veil of silent mystery is pulled back, we find their sh*t stinks like everyone elses.

Be right back

Happy families part 2!

Be right back

retro:electro wrote: »

Future Queen



Drama Queen



:pac:

Kate in the cheap seats.

Mrsmum

Be right back wrote: »

Kate in the cheap seats.

And Kate is the patron of Wimbledon or something like that, isn't she. Meghan would be too insecure to sit in the cheap seats.

BettyS

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

Nope. Once the veil of silent mystery is pulled back, we find their sh*t stinks like everyone elses.

I do think the Queen should have addressed the Andrew issue. And they should have spoken with the FBI. I don’t agree with the never complain, never explain in this case

Ms2011

BettyS wrote: »

I do think the Queen should have addressed the Andrew issue. And they should have spoken with the FBI. I don’t agree with the never complain, never explain in this case

She's silent when it suits and vocal when it comes to covering the RF's arse.
Sure didn't she intervene at the last minute when Diana's butler (Paul Burrell) was on trial for stealing stuff from Diana's estate. Let Burrell be arrested and go on trial but as soon as it looked like Burrell would take the stand and spill some RF secrets the queen intervened saying 'oh I gave him permission to take that stuff, I'm only telling you now cos I didn't realise this trial was taking place', complete bull, there was heavy media coverage of it at the time, there was no way the queen didn't know it was happening.

retro:electro

Interesting..

https://twitter.com/CamillaTominey/status/1378075615274885121?s=20

But we are led to believe they “had no plan”. And the deals with Netflix and Spotify were purely spontaneous in order to pay for security.

Sure Jan.

retro:electro

Harry said deals with the streaming giants were "never part of the plan", but said they needed cash to pay for security
He said: "That was suggested by somebody else by the point of where my family literally cut me off financially, and I had to afford security for us.
He said he and Meghan "genuinely hadn't thought" about cutting streaming deals, but added: "And look, from my perspective, all I needed was enough money to be able to pay for security to keep my family safe."


Never thought about streaming deals? What a pair of scheming liars.

Be right back

retro:electro wrote: »

Harry said deals with the streaming giants were "never part of the plan", but said they needed cash to pay for security
He said: "That was suggested by somebody else by the point of where my family literally cut me off financially, and I had to afford security for us.
He said he and Meghan "genuinely hadn't thought" about cutting streaming deals, but added: "And look, from my perspective, all I needed was enough money to be able to pay for security to keep my family safe."


Never thought about streaming deals? What a pair of scheming liars.

Their lies are really beginning to catch up with them now.

retro:electro

Be right back wrote: »

Their lies are really beginning to catch up with them now.

Tis unravellin’

jm08

retro:electro wrote: »

Harry said deals with the streaming giants were "never part of the plan", but said they needed cash to pay for security
He said: "That was suggested by somebody else by the point of where my family literally cut me off financially, and I had to afford security for us.
He said he and Meghan "genuinely hadn't thought" about cutting streaming deals, but added: "And look, from my perspective, all I needed was enough money to be able to pay for security to keep my family safe."

Never thought about streaming deals? What a pair of scheming liars.

I can't read the article as its behind a paywall. What had they intended to stream on this platform that didn't see the light of day?

Ash.J.Williams

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

And, predictably, their chat with Oprah has backfired. Their popularity in the UK and now in the US has gone down instead of up. https://www.thenationalnews.com/world/europe/harry-and-meghan-lose-support-in-us-after-oprah-interview-poll-finds-1.1187446

Sounds like they will need a new Head of Public Adoration.

I don’t buy this at all, measuring popularity of people in a country that doesn’t give 2 f**ks

MoonUnit75

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

I don’t buy this at all, measuring popularity of people in a country that doesn’t give 2 f**ks

The interview apparently had the highest viewership figures for a non-sporting broadcast in the US, somewhere around 21m viewers. The poll suggested only 13% of people watched the entire thing though, clearly they had enough whinging from the Duke and Duchess. If their popularity decreased it was because people were unconvinced by their tales.

MoonUnit75

jm08 wrote: »

I can't read the article as its behind a paywall. What had they intended to stream on this platform that didn't see the light of day?

It was some kind of sustainable travel show, seems to have gone down the tubes when COVID hit. Probably couldn’t afford them anymore.

jm08

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

It was some kind of sustainable travel show, seems to have gone down the tubes when COVID hit. Probably couldn’t afford them anymore.

Which could have been linked to their charities and involvement with Commonwealth Countries. Wasn't the Commonwealth one of the directions the Firm were pointing them in?

MoonUnit75

jm08 wrote: »

Which could have been linked to their charities and involvement with Commonwealth Countries. Wasn't the Commonwealth one of the directions the Firm were pointing them in?

The reports are saying the RF didn’t approve of this deal with a startup private company, seemed like cashing in on their titles and using the family name to launch a new brand. Seems a bit tacky for the RF. Meghan’s people in the US were the ones working on the deal.

You have to laugh at the idea of Harry and Meghan promoting sustainable tourism ‘Tip number 8: Consider sharing or borrowing a friend’s private jet, rather than purchasing your own’.

Be right back

This is a piece about their early deal.

JoChervil

I still can’t believe that there are people, who after this interview still believe their lies. They tripped themselves in it several times. Badly.

Meghan wants racial equality but then she wants to have title for her son. Monarchy go against human equality. Monarchy symbolise entitlement by birth and inequality. So she wants title superiority coming from birth but racial equality. Whatever suits her.

The same is with security. They want security as a threat coming from his birth but equality, which doesn’t depend on the colour of your skin. So if they believe people should be equal at birth, so why they moan about losing protection?

Isn’t her moaning about losing a title equal to talking about the shade of the colour of her baby skin? How different is it? She is openly discussing inequality. What’s more: wanting it. She wants superiority coming from the title. How different is it from racism?

Leg End Reject

They must have staggering large egos to have presumed none of their lies would have been exposed, especially given how easily some were refuted.

I think this is going to backfire spectacularly and I'm not sure if Meghan will feel quite the same about hapless Harry after ...

Purple Mountain

Leg End Reject wrote: »

They must have staggering large egos to have presumed none of their lies would have been exposed, especially given how easily some were refuted.

I think this is going to backfire spectacularly and I'm not sure if Meghan will feel quite the same about hapless Harry after ...

I vote retro and Legend for the follow up interview with H+M to "clarify" the inconsistencies!

Leg End Reject

Purple Mountain wrote: »

I vote retro and Legend for the follow up interview with H+M to "clarify" the inconsistencies!

Ah no, we'd probably get pissed beforehand!

The journalist who interviewed randy Andy would be perfect i think.

Be right back

Leg End Reject wrote: »

Ah no, we'd probably get pissed beforehand!

The journalist who interviewed randy Andy would be perfect i think.

Or Jeremy Paxman or Meghan's buddy, Piers!!

Leg End Reject

Be right back wrote: »

Or Jeremy Paxman or Meghan's buddy, Piers!!

Oh, good options too. Jeremy Paxman would be an excellent, and neutral, choice.

Sardonicat

I don't think it would matter who interviewed MM. She'd still just serve up a load of word salad with nothing definititve to pin her down on. I got the impression that she's very accomplished at that. An interviewer willing to point out that that is in fact what she appears to he doing is about as good as it would get.

Be right back

Not sure how true this account is..