Yes, Sue Smith video covered this too.Sorry if I'm derailing. Didn't get a chance to reply in the previous thread.
But if she was in tears at the Albert hall after spending a day with the dogs. You know when she was not safe to be left alone and cried every time the lights went down.
She was in a crowd. She arrived in a crowd, sat in a crowd and left in a crowd.
If it was me crying I would have snot trails, puffy eyes and red eyeballs.
She looked the same going in as coming out.
View attachment 476593
View attachment 476590
It's a good while since I was pregnant, but I definitely did not spend all the time with my hand or hands on my bump! When the baby was kicking, I certainly put my hand on it, but not the rest of the time.I know I've mentioned the contrived hand-on-the-stomach "I'm pregnant everyone!" pose numerous times, but it gives me the rage. It just highlights how conscious she is of getting attention. Nothing happens by accident with Meg, she knows what she's doing.
View attachment 476608
i have acknowledged your pain.I know I've mentioned the contrived hand-on-the-stomach "I'm pregnant everyone!" pose numerous times, but it gives me the rage. It just highlights how conscious she is of getting attention. Nothing happens by accident with Meg, she knows what she's doing.
View attachment 476608
If Charles isn't his father then either a, hats off to him for putting up with the miserable complaining git or b, now's the time to hit the ejector seat good and proper then ginge and whinge an do whatever the fuck they like. See how long before she divorces him if he turns out to be a commoner.Do you know what, I think he does look like Charles and is getting more like him as he gets olderdon't shoot me
Imagine needing to start a telephone conversation with a grandchild with “Can you assure me this conversation is not being recorded?” I mean dear lord....I‘m not even a royalist but that poor womanThe BP statement said that things will be addressed in private - probably with The Hag recording the call - so God knows how anything is going to be resolved. They can't trust Handbag at all now.
I think everything should be in writing and kept to the formal minimum. I don't think any family members should have any further personal conversations with Handbag from now on. He is treacherous.
I wouldn't be surprised if they have state of the art scrambler phones. Not just to disguise locations but to make sure that calls can't be recorded. If HMTQ didn't have one before she'll definitely have one now.Imagine needing to start a telephone conversation with a grandchild with “Can you assure me this conversation is not being recorded?” I mean dear lord....I‘m not even a royalist but that poor womanNo amount of money, tittles, or privilege can protect you from the pain of a family rift.
I just read this - very interesting!! Thank youMyleslea on Instagram has a very low opinion of OW. She forgot to get him to sign a gagging order so he’s free to describe her as a dark force.
Nice detective work, FarringdonI have a theory tattlers, on the Piers V MeAgain saga and I’d be interested in your thoughts.
initially Piers wrote raving reviews about Meghan. This piece was written in November 2017, around the time of their engagement announcement. I believe it refers to a meeting in June 2016, which is right before hazbeen and Migraine allegedly started dating.
PIERS: Congrats, Harry, but your romance ruined my Meghan friendship
His Royal ‘Naked Billiards’ Highness is at last settling down and getting married. I was delighted when I heard the news, not least because his bride-to-be is a friend. Or was, anyway.www.dailymail.co.uk
He talks about how clever, intelligent and stunning she is. It’s rather nauseating, and not really Piers’ style. It’s a similar style of fawning that Omid Scobie uses. More to the point, it makes two things clear
My theory is that Meghan was sucking up to piers, maybe offered him exclusives, in exchange for writing a glow-up review of her. I think she would’ve asked for the above two things to be included in the piece. She isn’t above doing this, as the finding freedom book supposedly written by Scobie, has clearly been heavily influenced by Meghan. So Meghan isn’t above using journalists and broadcasters as her mouthpieces. If anything it’s her modus operandi in her attempts to frame a narrative where she is a wonderful goddess amongst mere mortals.
- It mentions that bloody soap commercial that Meghan LOVES to bring up
- It explicitly states that Meghan was single.
Fast forward a year later and it’s a totally different story. It’s the same scenario, same drink in a pub, but with a totally different slant. Piers’ version of events if you will. I think he wanted to get the “real” version of events out.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...social-climbing-actress-used-getting-way.html
I think Meghan approached Piers to ask for help with boosting her profile now that she was dating Prince Harry. (Liz cundie wrote a article where Meghan approached her asking to be introduced to a rich British man, so stands to reason she would do something similar with piers and others) She mentioned the single thing because she was worried her cheating on Cory with Harry would come to light.
When she was married she no longer needed his help to boost her profile, so she ditched him.
What I think really gripes piers, and something he doesn’t mention, was just how much he’d been used. I think she essentially wrote the first article or at least closely collaborated on it, and he finds it galling that he fell for it and was complicit in her deceit. He thought it’d be a mutually beneficial arrangement where he’d boost her popularity and she’d give him a foot in the door to buddy up with the palace and Harry. Problem is she never held up her side of the bargain.
I think that’s why he has such a vendetta against her - he has experienced first hand just how calculated and ruthless she is, he knows first hand, but he can’t own up to it without bringing his own rep as a journalist into question.
Looked like a gnomeOn the previous thread to this there were many comments about which RF member made the racist comment about H&M's baby. It's unclear whether this comment was made when they got engaged, when she was pregnant with Farchy or indeed if the comment was made at all. Such an insult but Hazzno doesn't have a clue.
What I want to know is that with the evidence that Minge had a moonbump and was never pregnant, why is this racism comment is being given any credence? No wonder Hazzno looked shifty and unsure. It never happened.
Ditto a title for Farchy, lots of comments on the thread about what he would be called.
If there was a surrogate (and I don't believe there was) such child would not be given a title even when Charles becomes king. If Farchy was theirs he would have a title.
Rather than appear to concede that a racist remark was made about a baby, the RF need to deal with this or let the press uncover it. Deal with this issue and the whole lot will unravel.
Not a good idea to say it will be dealt with privately which seems like a cover up, and ditto worse to throw Andrew under the bus just because he's in a mess already,
The video of Farchy walking along the sand was very strange, he looked like a gnome.
Am I missing something here? Can someone please explain?
She's making sure it doesn't slip down round her knees again. It was around the same time, bar a day or two, that picture of her in the red/purple dress & coat appeared where she had 'something' hanging between her legs.I know I've mentioned the contrived hand-on-the-stomach "I'm pregnant everyone!" pose numerous times, but it gives me the rage. It just highlights how conscious she is of getting attention. Nothing happens by accident with Meg, she knows what she's doing.
View attachment 476608
On this pic she has lovely hair! What was she wearing on that interview?!I just read this - very interesting!! Thank you
I agree. If you see photos of Prince Philip as a very young man he and Harry are very alike.I've always thought that he looks much more like Prince Philip and I don't believe that Diana would have been that stupid.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?