Harry and Meghan - OP updated with Threadbanned Users 4/5/21
Comments
-
Why did he do what he did? Maybe he didn't like being made out to be the heel in a public relations piece in People magazine. Why did he go to the Mail? Maybe when they learned about letter correspondence they smelled an exclusive and offered Thomas a lot of money which he accepted. So her dad has her number and hasn't called? That is according to one unnamed anonymous friend which I wouldn't exactly deem as gospel.
In reading that article I can perhaps see two objectives. Make it known (via anonymity) to the public that Meghan loves her father, has tried to reconcile, is now estranged from him and to also make it known to the public that Thomas (in cahoots with Samantha) has no interest in reconciliation and they seem more interested in making money from their association with Meghan via media and interviews.
0 -
That’s an awful lot of whataboutery- if Meaghan was still in the working RF, and she had a serious medical procedure, I’ve no doubt the details would also have been kept secret - it’s happened many times through the years with different royals - once the palace gives some updates like “recovering well” or whatever there tends to be an agreement to leave it at that - only the salacious tittle tattlers like you appear to be want more.
0 -
I disagree, everything would have been leaked by William and his staff from dawn until dusk re the details, etc. This is how it was plus fictional stories also created while they were working royals.
3 -
Actual links to facts or evidence of these leaks?????
7 -
In their Netflix show (who don't warrant a mention on their new site btw), Harry said Meghan was doing the job better than his family. There was jealousy. They were riding a PR wave over the summer following their wedding into the Oz tour in Oct '18. Then everything changed. From November and December there was a wave of negative Sussex stories. The narrative and thinking was that his family must be responsible for this. Perhaps as you say William and the (Queens) staff working from dusk till dawn malevolently trying to take the Sussexes down. Injects some drama into it doesn’t it? I guess you have to do that when you're getting Netflix millions. To explain this, and to pinpoint an inflection point, they talk about the Sunday Telegraph and Remembrance Sunday which came right after that tour. Meghan got the cover.
Meghan: "The next morning they had set up breakfast for Harry and I"
Harry: "And on the front page of the Telegraph. Meghan"
Meghan: "I went "Oh my God""
Harry: "She was like 'But it's not my fault' and I said 'I know. And my Mum felt the same way'"
There is a manipulation going on here which cuts deeply into their credibility. The message is that when Meghan won the Remembrance Sunday cover this resulted in antagonism, animosity, jealousy and an agenda to clip her wings by the family who began leaking to the press. Injecting the drama. Fed to the wolves because Meghan was the star of the show and this could not stand. It was what triggered the post-Oz tour negative stories and ultimately lead to them having to step away just over a year later. This was 2018. However once you look at some facts Meghan made the cover in Nov '19 whereas it was the Queen who was on the cover in Nov '18. Meghan was on the Remembrance Day cover a year after the Australian tour.
Harry and William had fallen out over the summer of '18. Harry himself confirms this when he wrote of staff members slumped over desks and crying and that William blamed Meghan for causing it (a Bullying investigation subsequently took place).
Harry (in Spare) retorted that his brother was repeating the press narrative, spouting fake stories he'd read or been told. However negative stories (Sussex behaviour, staff leaving in droves etc.) only started emerging (according to H&M) and became their norm after Nov '18 so the question is how could William be repeating press stories which didn't even exist yet? They admitted themselves in the show that they were on a PR high along with positive press coverage that summer.
It's plausible that what William was actually repeating to Harry was not these non-existent press stories but rather what he'd been told directly by staff, press secretaries and what he'd seen and heard himself about their behaviour and treatment of staff e.g. after one member of staff was torn down as incompetent by Meghan she was subsequently reassured by William as doing a good job. Valentine Low described treatment of staff during this time as the Sussexes behaving like spoiled teenagers.
During the Australian tour Harry wrote in "Spare" of warning Meghan about doing too well, about making it look effortless, too easy, about being better at being royal than his family because that is what his mother did and for which she suffered alienation, resentment and rejection. This aggrandising of his wife and the jealousy stemming from that wasn't what caused a rift. What reportedly caused the rift was William being peeved about treatment of staff.
He was the then heir to the heir but, in assuming, in the months after a 32 million quid wedding, that the Sussexes were going to be long term working royals he was putting his foot down about treatment of staff, addressing staff turnover and Harry fell out with him because William quite reasonably didn't take his side and (unforgivable to a besotted Harry) observed that Meghan was to blame as well as him. Staff crying over their desks? Competent, intelligent staff being insulted to their face and driven to tears? It is the Royal family where the work is pressing the flesh, cutting ribbons, making pleasantries, smiling and waving etc. It is mainly dull, boring and unglamorous. My guess was Williams point was that it isn't a cutthroat start up with ROI goals and deadlines for investors i.e. grow the hell up, chill out and cop on ffs.
I think that was what lead to a rift and that rift bled out as it invariably does into the press (e.g. why exactly are their households being split?). William taking umbrage with treatment of staff and of not backing up his brother and his sister in law for behaving like a pair of teenagers. Instead of acknowledging their own contribution to what was quickly a toxic working environment and accepting that as a consequence of this it inevitably and subsequently leaked its way to the press, they decided that 1 +1 equals 7 and so they were blameless, that they didn't do anything wrong, that instead (via cognitive dissonance) they were just too good, too brilliant, were victims of jealousy and were quite happy to double down on it all and make some money from it via marketing Meghan to America as Diana 2.0 and Harry as the Dragon Slayer fighting the press who collaborated with a family he still loves and wants to save.
3 -
Advertisement
-
A very good summary of the overall problems by reference to a specific example.
1 -
It’s been stated on more than one occasion that William and Camilla are constantly leaking about them to boost their own image. It’s amazing that Camilla met Jeremy Clarkson at a Christmas party and he then published a disgusting article about Meghan afterwards - just as Harry and Meghan’s Netflix documentary was released detailing how the attacks and press articles happen. The case in point was right there for all to see. The Palace never even issued a rebuttal of such an article, and haven’t to this day re other comments from Bower, etc which not only are dangerous, they’re a serious security threat to Harry, Meghan and their family.
2 -
'Its been stated'
So, no then Donald, no evidence proof
5 -
You’ve gone into a lot of detail in this post but most of it is an attempt to paint William as the good guy and Harry and Meghan as the villains. You’ve also done a lot of psychoanalysing of Harry and Meghan and made a lot of assumptions with no proof re Harry and Meghan’s treatment if their staff, maybe Meghan isn’t workshy like William and expected efficient staff. You also do not know the reception the staff gave Meghan or indeed the other Royals.
William has been accused of leaking stories re Harry and Meghan to the pews in exchange for no coverage of his alleged affair with Rose Hanbury.
I don’t think Harry and Megan are saint's by any standards but the vilification they get on a daily basis is ridiculous. Murdoch publications in particular.
3 -
What is interesting here is that all the tabloid reporting about staff turnover, Duchess Difficult, who made who cry etc. is all still available to read. It didn't get taken down. It's as if they stood over their reporting, were legally confident in their sourcing. Valentine Low for example who initially broke the bullying allegations has said while he received legal correspondence/noted from Schillings (Sussex lawyers) asserts that they never took the next logical step of actually suing him.
This is even after H&M left for America and (allegedly) have a $120 million war chest to sue these papers with. In contrast The Sun article about the William/Rose affair rumour was successfully taken down by the simple decision of Hanburys brother threatening to sue them. Conspiracy theories then crop up based on this i.e. the article was taken down? Must be William dealing with the Murdochs. 2 + 2 = 5.
2 -
Advertisement
-
The bullying allegations came about 2 days before the Oprah interview. That was 14/15 months after the Sussex's had left England. H&M didn't speak to anyone for 14/15 months, so what was William's & Charles's excuse for ignoring them for that period of time.
2 -
Informative article. Christian Jones (who was nearly made himself sick trying to protect William over the Hanbury gossip) is the partner of the person who was selling stories to (I think) The Sun. Harry was citing him as selling stories to the papers in his court case against the Sun. The Palace threatened to remove H&M security if he didn't withdraw his name from the court case. (CJ was also a close friend of Dan Wootton's). Harry would not back down from naming him in his court case and The Palace withdrew his security. CJ is still working for William. I bet he knows where all the bodies are buried.
3 -
However, William’s lawyers did shut down the cheating allegations in April 2019.
Attorneys with London law firm Harbottle & Lewis told British publications at the time, “In addition to being false and highly damaging, the publication of false speculation in respect of our clients’ private life also constitutes a breach of his privacy pursuant to Article 8 of the European Convention to Human Rights.”
The British press will have a field day when the UK ditches the European Court of Human Rights. Nothing to threaten them with.
2 -
Actually, there are numerous 'Royal Experts' on record who say that the Palace is as leaky as a sieve. Way too numerous to actually go through them now. The funniest one is of Piers Morgan saying what a great person Meghan is and how the royal family don't have a great record on racism.
Where do you think the leak about Harry not wanting Camilla to be in the room when he spoke with his father came from?
3 -
Are you saying it is Christian Jones selling the stories to The Sun or his partner? What is the partners name?
0 -
Well, he was a heel! I know the reason he went to the Mail was for the money.
Now, why should Meghan have anything to do with him if all he wants to do is sell her out to these papers who have caused her so much stress. And Meghan has said she will connect with him privately, but she is not going to do it in the media.
1 -
Yes. In conjunction with Hanburys brother. The Sun took it down. Think about why they took it down.
1 -
the Palace is as leaky as a sieve.
' The palace ' is not the royal family.
How many thousands are employed?
1 -
-
The rumored affair. Did some digging and reading about it. It's odd that Kate still regularly socialises with Rose despite her allegedly having it away with her husband. Given how friendly they are then perhaps this rumour stems from the press gagging for a box office repeat of Diana versus Camilla but it never manifested and is now kept alive by conspiracy theorists e.g. I read that William fathered one of Roses kids. I read that on a blue tick X account so it is most definitely true (lol). Rose is married to David Cholmondeley since 2009. July 2016 they host a private fundraiser for a childrens hospice which Kate is a patron of. Pictures are taken of this formal event. One has William and Kate both looking across at Rose. Since it was a private event then W&K attending was indicative of a mutual friendship with R&D. A year later this friendship lead to Rose invited to a Spanish state banquet where she was escorted and seated with Harry. In March '19 an "Exclusive" is written in The Sun by Dan Wooten. Kate tells William she wants Rose "phased out".
The general public thinks "Rose who?". It's Diana versus Camilla again everyone! Remember that this is the same Dan Wooten who conspiracy theorists say is in league with staff of the Cambridges to leak stories about H&M. Or something. Is it just me thinking that it's odd that the journo they are in cahoots with is betraying their arrangement by writing a sh*t stirring article about their marriage? Wootens exclusive includes quotes from Roses brother about the affair and how her husband, David, is gay. Cue Roses brother swiftly denying this, threatening to sue for libel and slander. Throw in William also threatening legal action and the article is pulled. Whatever happened to print and be damned? Oh right, because it was predicated on nonsense. R&D are private citizens unlike W&K who are well known public "property" (i.e. subjected to inevitable general gossip, rumors and expected to accept that as a consequence of their profile and status). Given the former any such tabloid shenanigans were shut down since they wouldn't last the legal test i.e. if the Sun stood by their reporting then they'd have been successfully sued. It ought to be telling (regardless of any bias) that The Sun pulled the article.
After that article was pulled Giles Coren replied to a user tweet wondering what was going on by saying it is an "affair", that everyone knows about the "affair", even a Jew like himself knows about the "affair". A couple of weeks after the Sun story was pulled Rose became an official patron for the childrens hospice charity mentioned above. She visited the building of a hospice and was photographed at it. Friends showing a united front. However Wootens article (and its removal) now meant that self-appointed reporters (i.e. any attention seeker/grifter with a social media account) were subsequently promising to break this story wide open. The internet never forgetting Wootens article.
Cue a pro-Sussex blogger (Nicole Cliffe) on Twitter fuelled and inspired by Wootens article in a twitter thread consisting of "a great deal of editorialising" i.e. speculating about the rumor. For example, how Prince "think of your three kids!" Harry chewed William out for pulling the same **** their dad had done. She had a Blue Tick so what she was saying must also be true. Despite Cliffe and Coren not having any connection to R&D or W&K all of this was deemed as further confirmation of an affair. However once the rubber hit the road with Coren called out on his confirmation he folded and said he was making it up, had no idea about anything royal, doesn't even know Rose. A couple of years after that he wrote in The Telegraph that he had been at a boozy lunch and was drunk tweeting in the cab on his way home. Cliffe was also called out and wrote in a blog post that she had no special information and she was a private person i.e. I was speculating, theorising and I might be right but wouldn't bet on it because what I've heard could actually be other people also making stuff up and tweeting out loud.
So the proof of this affair rested on Coren who was drunk tweeting for attention, another who was speculating like everyone else and a tabloid story that was quickly retracted following a threat of litigation. To top that off consider Harry writing in Spare about a furious William ringing him up about a tabloid story. The timing (Spring '19) aligns with the Wooten article which was obviously sufficient to warrant such a strong reaction. Harry (not confirming it is specifically that story) writes that it was disgusting, false and not true at all. Since he was also writing about stuff like a physical fight with William it is odd that he didn't take the chance to stir the pot by not exactly denying the rumour. Tina Brown and Robert Lacey who in researching their respective royal books (The Palace Papers, Battle of Brothers) were also unable to find anything substantive about an affair to include it in their books.
Fast forward to the end of 2021 and the story still has legs. Alex Tiffin on Twitter (with his blue tick) tweets that court injunctions issued in London are worthless in Scotland where he is resident and so he will withstand legal pressure against the fact William and Rose had an affair, that journalism trumped a royal afforded legal protection from the truth. It all emerged as tepid tea and Alex, now with hundreds more subscribers to his blog, had successfully executed a grift. This is the same guy who sparked a terror scare in Scotland by texting attendees at a mosque prayer that he wanted to "kill the unbelievables". He was also charged with assaulting a pregnant woman. So the proof for the affair hinges on a journalist with a drinking problem, a terror level raising grifter and a blogger who walked back her opining after getting challenged on it.
Last August Kate, Rose and David were pictured at a rave festival. Because what one does is not only socialise with the woman having an affair with your husband also do it in the presence of the husband she is cheating on.
2 -
Advertisement
-
None of the staff mistreatment have been proven. It was claimed that one assistant was fired by Meghan, when in fact it wasn't her who fired her. The real story is that the staff employed were even more racist (and not just colour, being American as well - similarities with Mrs. Simpson continually being drawn on), than the royals themselves. She was too hardworking for the staff.
One of the staff who was said to have been bullied by Meghan left and later joined joined Boris Johnson's cabinet office. Does that sound like a person who was bullied by anyone, let alone by another woman.
Then there was the investigation into the bullying which was quietly disbanded by the Royal Family. Why was that dropped.
Its worth noting that the person in all of this, William Private Secretary, Simon Case (Harry referred to him as the fly because if there was any **** going down, he was in it) has since been appointed head of the civil service and has been accused of bullying himself. He took sick leave for a couple of months to avoid the Covid Enquiry and the Rawanda hearing. It seems he also had a problem with Carrie Johnson (too influencial over Boris) as well, so I wonder if misogony as well as racism played a part in all of this as well. You can see a similar theme being put about that Meghan is controlling Harry.
As for the £32m wedding. That was the Royal Family wanting to use it for PR. Most the guests were RF guests, not Meghans. She bought and paid for her own dress. The main cost was security and management of the crowds. She just had to put up with it for the Royal Family. Her first marriage was a very relaxed affair on a beach in Jamaica. Can you explain why you think she should have been grateful for that?
Meghan & Harry are a far more more natural and at ease with the public than William & Kate, so in a top down hierarchy like the Royal Family, that was bad news. Philip was always a couple of feet behind QEII. H&M were getting above their station and had to be knocked back. Think William & Kate overdid the knocking back though. Harry by the way, was always more popular than William (until Meghan arrived on the scene and ruined him. LOL).
1 -
Speculation and subjective opinion. If there was no bullying then why wasn't Valentine Low and The Times sued for reporting on it? Harry sued ANL for being called out on security shenanigans so why not that? Why was Jenny Afia giving a defintion (to grown ups) of what bullying is?
Why was the internal bullying investigation which from the outset was known it would be kept internal dropped? Suggesting it was dropped is manipulative and infers the investigation amounted to nothing. It wasn't dropped. It was concluded and the internal bullying investigation which we knew would be kept internal was, shock, kept internal. We don't know what that investigation concluded but the Palace statement reiterating that it wouldn't be released included some telling clues i.e. "lessons have been learned" and its HR policies changed. So read between the lines.
Why were lessons learned and policy changed if nothing happened? Clearly things were happening and for me whatever was happening could have lead to rifts and the interview/series/book/ongoing PR we see which gives the Sussex side of what is clearly a rift. I highlighted one part of that yesterday which demonstrates how H&M manipulated audiences about the negative press they got. Their side? We were popular. My family took us down via the press. Another side? Whatever was happening behind closed doors which promoted a change in HR policy was possibly causing that negative press.
So they were now forced into a big wedding? Did he write about that in his memoir? I can't remember. Yeah the same two adults who made the decision to leave 18 months after they got married for their best interests were pressured into a big wedding for PR. Victims. Again.
Post edited by valoren on0 -
The partner was never named. You can read all about it here. https://bylinetimes.com/2023/12/09/in-plain-sight-the-picture-the-palace-probe-missed/
Basically, Jones was passing on stories to his partner who was selling them to Dan Wootton. Jones lied that he was a friend of Dan Wootton, yet was photograph at a close friends birthday party of Woottons. Which meant he lied in the investigation.
Jones is described as being very close advisor to Prince William (he has left it to join a Private Equity company). Really interesting then to see him photographed in William's entourage when visiting Kate in hospital.
Some crisis management help maybe?
1 -
Hard to sue Lowe/The Times - because all they have to do to defend themselves is that a source told them and it was reasonable for them to believe it true. The usual British media defence that works. That how Morgan got away with his '17 lies statements'. Said it on Fox in the US and the rest report what was said on Fox, so you can sue the Times for reporting what Fox said!
The Palace could have helped by actually defending them once or twice, but they didn't. The 'never complain part' only applied to them.
Jane Afia - maybe she explained to the Palace officials that sending an email at 5am is not bullying.
Simon Case (who made the charges) obviously hadn't a clue as he has since been accused of bullying himself.
Prince William's former aide from the era when Meghan Markle was accused of bullying staff is under pressure to quit his job at the top of the British government.
https://www.newsweek.com/meghan-markle-bullying-allegations-simon-case-whatsapp-messages-1786535
The lessons learned was that they had no policy on how to deal with bullying allegations.
According to the new edition of Finding Freedom, “sources confirmed that upon discovery of Jason’s email, two of the individuals mentioned in the email asked for any allegations made to HR about their experiences with Meghan to be rescinded.”
After The Times report, Buckingham Palace launched an official investigation conducted by an independent law firm. Their findings were supposed to have been released in June, but have since been delayed and may not come out until 2022.
According to that, they were going to release the findings. I wonder why they didn't?
Fact is they were very popular and outshining the other two.
Where did I say they were forced into a big wedding? My point is that they were not demanding it and would have been just as happy to get married on a beach in Jamaica, but it was expected of them to have this big Royal Family PR event (everyone loves weddings and births and all of that).
0 -
An interview with one of Meghan's cousins.
Speaking in an exclusive interview with DailyMail.com, the now Duchess of Sussex's cousin Shawn Johnson, 43, said: 'She was always really sweet. She was kind and she always had a star quality about her.
'She was infectious with just the way she was and really mature for her age. She was always really looking after us and making sure that we're all doing fine.'
And you people here think she completely changed into a narcisist since then?
1 -
So is Meghan still “sweet and kind” towards her father?
1 -
You were claiming that it was Hanbury's brother solely, and not the Palace.
0 -
The Royal Family don't speak themselves in general to the press except Camilla who seems to be pally with a lot of them.
What the Royal Family do is let their aids/spokespersons do it for them* (and that is who I mean).
(example, Knauf speaking to Carolyn Durand and Omid Scobie was understood to be Meghan speaking directly to them).
0 -
So no one has ever been able to sue the media in Britain because of their impenetrable source defence. Okey dokey.
Afia explained that bullying was someone taking advantage of a power imbalance. When you're explaining, you're losing.
Simon Case? Not sure what Case acting the bollox elsewhere has to do with Sussex bullying allegations but, sure, pick him as another fall guy.
Lessons learned, report findings were to and allegations rescinded included in a new epilogue from Finding Freedom. Yeah I'll be taking whatever known Sussex collaborator/spinner Omid Scobie claims with a serious dose of cynicism/side eye.
She just had to put up with (the wedding) for the benefit of the Royal Family you said. I'd take that to mean she was forced to accept it wouldn't you? Just more of the usual victim playing.
0 -
Advertisement
-
I never said "solely". See another post above saying William also threatened to sue.
0
