Trying to keep up with his 'very bright' wifePrince Harry is trying to 'keep up with very bright' Meghan Markle
Speaking to The Telegraph, celebrity agent Jonathan Shalit said the Duke of Sussex, 36, may be trying to put himself on par with the 'hugely astute' Duchess, 39.www.dailymail.co.uk
Fucking hilarious!!
Wu could be our singing Prime Minister - certainly deserves a chair in the Cabinet - bravo!Brilliant Wu!
This was just my take on the Daily Star exclusive. I found it odd that H&M say in this article that they believed that Porka would "make their story believable and reliable in the US....as Oprah was trustworthy" etc.
Although their interview was full of lies, holes and inconsistencies it's as though they are peeved with Porka for not having magicked it all true, and because of Porka's fame made viewers believe that everything they said was Gospel. They thought that Porka could turn their lies into facts like water into wine.
They've now seen the public reaction and the fallout to what they thought would be a Dead Cert Dream Team, the Porka 'N Minge Duo, and it's not what they were expecting. This could be why there's the slant in the article that they relied on Porka and are possibly disappointed that she didn't get their message and Truth across. If so it's a scary example of how deranged they are, as even a chat-show host as big as Porka can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.
That thread is gold, its over 7000 pages long. I've got to page 11, maybe we can do a relay to see if there are any gems on there we hav missed. I'm happy to go to page 50I have a feeling that these are Americans:
Unpopular Opinions #MeghanandHarryonOprah | Page 2 | Lipstick Alley
The Royals | Lipstick Alley
Thank you ... it just seems so far fetched, yet in all of this anything seems possibleYes it’s from Quora - Benjamin Smallbrook.
what `I meant was, it does affect line of succession into the future, if say George marries and his wife has to have IVF or even consider a surrogacy for their child, this has an impact on the RF's Current succession laws. If they decide to up hold "of the body " succession may fall to Charlotte's offspring. Its a fast changing world, and I think the RF needs to reflect that.But that's not for the RF to do, it's the law of the UK and has been challenged recently in court.
Thank you @Scotch MistBaroness Bruck on Twitter has this information on surrogacy
View attachment 504674
Slowly , slowly catchy monkey....all good things will come to pass!!I'm just still angry there hasn't been a defending of kate officially. And markle and her fans, sugars and Hollywood have essentially just tried to happily bully another woman and her family. I want Oprah and her ilk to pay!
Another story built around a quote from 'Professor' Jonathan Shalit. He normally pops up to say the Harkles will be a billion dollar brand, Meghan is fighting off movie deals and similar dribble. He's on the payroll for these sort of quotes.Trying to keep up with his 'very bright' wife
It's increasingly obvious that Smeggy is nowhere near as bright as she thinks she is. An intelligent person wouldn't be sniping at the royal family thinking that it reflects well on her!
She comes across as mean petty and stupid!
They made one important change before George's birth, which allowed the first born child, male or female, to inherit the crown. That was a big and a crucial change. The monarchy adapts gradually over time. Any decisions around surrogacy are questions that don't affect Charles, William or George, but the next in line again. That's a long way away. Although, Charles will have planned some adjustments along the lines of the Swedish Royal family, which quite sensibly include the requirement to be educated in Sweden.Thank you ... it just seems so far fetched, yet in all of this anything seems possible
what `I meant was, it does affect line of succession into the future, if say George marries and his wife has to have IVF or even consider a surrogacy for their child, this has an impact on the RF's Current succession laws. If they decide to up hold "of the body " succession may fall to Charlotte's offspring. Its a fast changing world, and I think the RF needs to reflect that.
Thank you @Scotch Mist
This is what we needed for clarification
..."She's dismal in any of the clips ... I've seen her in". Come on, that's a bit harsh. Haven't you seen the iconic Filing Cabinet love scene in Suits when the doomed attorneys prove their love? It's Paralegal Minge and that alien with a head like a bullet all forehead and no chin. In a cupboard. For sheer romance that scene beats Titanic, Gone With The Wind and Zhivago imho.I replied to a comment on social media saying look at her IMDb and no response. That’s because if you look at it you’ll easily see she was a nobody bit part actress. Main part in a made for TV movie hallmark type film. She’s dismal in any of the clips I’ve been unfortunate enough to have seen her in
You’re so right I’m not giving her enough credit. She was destined for Hollywood. Look at this absolute masterclass from about 0.40. Move over Jodie Comer!..."She's dismal in any of the clips ... I've seen her in". Come on, that's a bit harsh. Haven't you seen the iconic Filing Cabinet love scene in Suits when the doomed attorneys prove their love? It's Paralegal Minge and that alien with a head like a bullet all forehead and no chin. In a cupboard. For sheer romance that scene beats Titanic, Gone With The Wind and Zhivago imho.
Ooh that's interesting and of course it makes sense for the child to be educated in the home country.Another story built around a quote from 'Professor' Jonathan Shalit. He normally pops up to say the Harkles will be a billion dollar brand, Meghan is fighting off movie deals and similar dribble. He's on the payroll for these sort of quotes.
They made one important change before George's birth, which allowed the first born child, male or female, to inherit the crown. That was a big and a crucial change. The monarchy adapts gradually over time. Any decisions around surrogacy are questions that don't affect Charles, William or George, but the next in line again. That's a long way away. Although, Charles will have planned some adjustments along the lines of the Swedish Royal family, which quite sensibly include the requirement to be educated in Sweden.
Cant say I am sorry I missed that but I think I have seen a picture of it. She looks no better than a tart!! As Prince Philip allegedly told Harry, you dont marry an actress. Pity he didnt take any notice...."She's dismal in any of the clips ... I've seen her in". Come on, that's a bit harsh. Haven't you seen the iconic Filing Cabinet love scene in Suits when the doomed attorneys prove their love? It's Paralegal Minge and that alien with a head like a bullet all forehead and no chin. In a cupboard. For sheer romance that scene beats Titanic, Gone With The Wind and Zhivago imho.
The sad thing about all of this crap is that Hazno would probably not have been allowed to marry her if she was a white low rent actress.Cant say I am sorry I missed that but I think I have seen a picture of it. She looks no better than a tart!! As Prince Philip allegedly told Harry, you dont marry an actress. Pity he didnt take any notice.
Several pages behind, but this is an OMG moment!Right, this morning on my IG account an article popped up discussing the next moves MM ab JCMH could be considering to keep the pressure on regarding security cost. I have to say I went to have another look and I can't find it now so I could quote the source.... There was a strong feeling that as we've had the intruders at their Cali mansion ( highly skeptical ). we may now get the Kidnapping of Archie !! Yes, honestly, the thought is that as we have no clear pictures of Archie, no first hand witnesses of the child and as he is allegedly not living with them, this would be a right problem for the FBI /CIA looking for an almost invisible child . I do think this is highly improbable, but interesting none the less. Surely, the Markle if Archie does exist will have family photos of him. BUT if he didn't exist after all it would be a very "convenient " for them.
I truly hope this is just someone putting the wrong sums together, I wouldn't wish that on anybody.... Just passing on what I read. I would be interested to know if anybody else saw that article? Wish I'd paid more attention now.
That's what cracked me up 'bright wife' nah she ain't bright she's just cunningTrying to keep up with his 'very bright' wife
It's increasingly obvious that Smeggy is nowhere near as bright as she thinks she is. An intelligent person wouldn't be sniping at the royal family thinking that it reflects well on her!
She comes across as mean petty and stupid!
She was pretending to be pregnant and that's how she trapped him into marriage.I remember watching the wedding with my mum and she piped up that she wondered if Megz was already pregnant due to a look that passed between H&M when the vicar mentioned children. She said it was like they had a secret between the two of them regarding babies. This makes so much sense!
Hmmmm, this is interesting. The first appearances of Archie showed him as a new-ish born baby. According to the link above, were Archie born by surrogate then she is his natural mother. Births in the UK by law are to registered within 6 weeks of birth & so the natural mother would have been expected to register the birth. Once the child is registered then the new parents, providing a small set of criteria are met, can register the child by a Parental Order - if we’ll managed, it is possible for the process to be expedited. So if Archie is UK born he will have a UK birth certificate who ever he was born to. Were Archie not born in the UK, matters are more complex but the essential process is the same.Surrogacy: legal rights of parents and surrogates
Legal rights for intended parents and surrogates; how legal parenthood is transferred; children born outside the UK; pay and leave rightswww.gov.uk
Surely some investigative journalists out there must be aware there may have been moonbumps used and surely they will be digging around.
The Sun got hold of the marriage certificate by buying a copy.
Anybody researching their family tree can buy Birth, Death and Marriage certificates - so has anyone bought a copy of Archie's?
Or is there some legal block on it?
Yep I call it "Shit and Run".You made the fatal error of reading replies. I just drop my comment on DM and never go back!
The thing that is most odd to me is the Notice pinned to the easel.Hmmmm, this is interesting. The first appearances of Archie showed him as a new-ish born baby. According to the link above, were Archie born by surrogate then she is his natural mother. Births in the UK by law are to registered within 6 weeks of birth & so the natural mother would have been expected to register the birth. Once the child is registered then the new parents, providing a small set of criteria are met, can register the child by a Parental Order - if we’ll managed, it is possible for the process to be expedited. So if Archie is UK born he will have a UK birth certificate who ever he was born to. Were Archie not born in the UK, matters are more complex but the essential process is the same.
MM has played a blinder is some respects around her pregnancy, giving birth & then presenting Archie- firmly in control & eking out images etc. However, I think she made some fundamental miscalculations up front.
Firstly, the condition of being ‘by body born’ - after all how many people knew that before now?
Hardly expect it to be so of someone who did not know the British national anthem, even after living in Canada as an adult.
MM expected the Royal Stork to deliver the Prince badge along with bebe, or at least arrive by post.
By not following the BAU of a royal-ish pregnancy & birth, she has lead to wild speculation about the actual pregnancy.
The smart thing would have been to be in the care of the Royal Medics, natural pregnancy or not (IFSWIM), because she would have tended to with care from an experienced crew who would understand the pressure of a pregnancy under such scrutiny. These are up-to-date medical teams well versed in protocols of surrogacy. Maybe even have looked after the surrogate mother? Loose thread there to pull later.
Not dressing well or with care during her pregnancy.
Bit too much body con mebbe.
Yes, she’s yogabendy, is it possible to crouch on heels like that when so pregnant?
Who knows what the ’moonbump’ was about, what was that thing?
Announcing the labour when she had already given birth - bad PR?
Coldly formal note on gates at BP.
Archies’s first appearance.
Here I wonder: both Kate & Diana appeared on hospital steps within hours to present newborn. Each time new mum emerges for photo op all washed & brushed, in a stylish loose frock that elegantly drapes over apres-bebe tummy. Cheers from loyal wellwishers outside the hospital, the nation oohs & aaahs over sweet pictures, marvels over how well everyone looks & waves off new mum to get home, climb into something baggy & get some zzzzzz.
So YOY does MM pitch up to present Archie a few days after birth in the most uncomfortable unflattering safari dress with a tie belt hoiked over her bebe belly (which I thought looked quite high). For a woman who has spent £1000s on dresses to be worn for a few hours, why did she go for skint on this occasion when the pix would be syndicated worldwide? Seems odd to me.
Found this online:There's been controversy about the birth certificate, as M changed her name on it (so that it says Her Royal Highness, The Duchess of Sussex on it, not Rachel Meghan etc). She claimed it was at the orders of the Palace. They immediately said it was her choice. It's all a bit weird and I don't quite understand what it was all about. As usual, Markle revels in mystification and obfuscation, smoke and mirrors, leading us all to speculate wildly.
How DID a change to Archie's birth certificate cause a toxic row?
The Duchess of Sussex's Christian names, Rachel Meghan, disappeared from her son Archie's birth certificate three weeks after it was registered in May 2019. So what exactly happened?www.dailymail.co.uk
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?