Harry & Meghan #424 Anus Whoreibilis

Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
I really had to laugh at this photograph of Kate Winslet in a magazine called First Class UK. She has been airbrushed beyond all recognition. Obviously that’s fine though 🤷‍♀️
 

Attachments

  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 40
I remember a friends husband had chrons disease and my god the day to day dealing with that when it was at its best was bloody tough. Then he needed a bowel resection and had a (hopefully) temporary stoma.
Its an incredibly tough surgery to not only recover from but the months or so afterwards living with a stoma and the practicalities and limitations of that, a busy family life and sex life. And keep performing at his job. His mental health definitely took a big wobble and he was just a guy not in the public eye and working in an office doing accounting.

I have no idea if Catherine is going through any of that but if it's anything similar, she deserves love and care. She's not a random bloke in an office you wouldn't look twice at. She's the POW, and the most photographed woman in the world. Her people need to be vocal in the shout to leave her the duck alone.

This bullshit from some corners their right to her medical info as "they pay for her" well, you've got the NHS, everyone's medical treatment is from taxpayers money too so it should all be published if you expect hers to be.

The Irish president was in hospital recently and the only reaction was "aw, hope he's ok" and "aw, glad he's on the mend.

As well as that, the tone of sympathy and respect male public figures get- Charles, BoJo, etc even Huw Edwards compared to the treatment female public figures are subjected to is uncomfortable and misogynistic.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
  • Angry
Reactions: 61
Who cares what the harkles and their sugars think about anything? Their views and opinions are immaterial 😃😆😆😆

We will see The Princess of Wales after her recovery- when she is good and ready- and not before. And it's nobody's business but THEIRS.

The harkles aren't part of the United Kingdoms Royal Family any longer & live 6,000 miles away on another Continent. He IS related to our Monarch but doesn't have any part - or say- in our RF. End of Story.
He remains in the line of succession as do his children
I demand proof of life of the Prince and Princess of L.A
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 42
How can Judge Honeywell say that everything they said in the interview with Oprah and the Netflix documentary was true. It is definitely dodgy and it makes me wonder if she was paid a lot of money to rule in Meghan's favour and not let Samantha appeal because it seems strange to just close the case without letting the plaintiff appeal. I also don't understand why Judge Honeywell would she say that Samantha had failed to identify any statements that could support a claim for defamation or defamation-by-implication when Samantha herself provided significant evidence to prove defamation. It doesn't make any sense to me.
BIB: I haven’t read the whole order yet, but I wanted to address your statement about an appeal.The court did not say she does not have the right to appeal. Rather, the judge dismissed Samantha’s claims “with prejudice”, as she has already amended her complaint multiple times and to allow yet another amendment would be futile. Samantha can still appeal the district court’s decision to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. If she fails at the circuit court level, she can then attempt to appeal to the US Supreme Court. She may not be inclined to file an appeal, though, as appeals can be expensive.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
  • Sad
Reactions: 34
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/three of us in this marriage 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".

It's Diana versus Camilla again everyone! Or not. Remember that this is the same Dan Wooten who conspiracy theorists (and Harry) say is in league with an aide of the Cambridges to leak stories about H&M.

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 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.

That this alleged affair is still being drawn up is ridiculous.
Your BIB.
Not only are injunctions issued in London worthless in Scotland, they are worthless worldwide.
If it were true then I’d expect it to be common knowledge all over the world by now (even in the UK) instead of whisperings and rumours.
It’s not David and Wallis in the 1930’s any more where only foreign press could print it and the UK was kept in the dark.
So if any learned soul anywhere in the four corners of the earth can point to where the alleged affair has been published and proven, then I’m sure we will all be hanging on to your every word.

We’re waiting.
And waiting … and waiting …

It’s nonsense.
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 36
View attachment 2811644
Disappointingly Megyn Kelly is fully onboard the speculation train, and her commentator said it’s like a film noir. They reference the same source HIH reference who said the Mother’s Day photo is the same as the Vogue cover kate did.

Urgghh. I don’t know guys. It’s the same woman pulling the same face. All I know is, this whole story is making me feel uncomfortable!

It’s not the same picture!! Many people take the same picture! My husband comes out the same in almost every photo. We joke that it’s not really him in photos, just a cardboard cutout.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Heart
Reactions: 44
He remains in the line of succession as do his children
I demand proof of life of the Prince and Princess of L.A
The chick that does T N T UK reckons the boy is Harry's not MMs, born from an affair and at first the mother let them 'use' him for photos etc but has since refused and gone back to the UK. She reckons the girl was a surrogate deal that fell through. She reckons if they were there, they would be used over and over - a narcissist doesn't give up any chance to be centre of attention, showing off kids - especially at the birth.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
  • Haha
Reactions: 32
Are these muppets really gloating about a wonky photoshop when nobody will ever top the cringe, tackiness and sheer stupidity of this?:

Screenshot 2024-03-12 at 9.45.10 PM.png
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Sick
Reactions: 39
This is why no PR agency will ever turn her reputation around. She has no self control and can't help being a witch and putting people down in an attempt to make herself look perfect. I love how many times she fucks it up
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 43
It’s not the same picture!! Many people take the same picture! My husband comes out the same in almost every photo. We joke that it’s not really him in photos, just a cardboard cutout.
One of my cousins and a former classmate make exactly the same pose in all photos, no matter the place or situation. One of them has had two children and her body has changed so much, but when she does that pose, she looks exactly the same as she did 15 years ago when I first met her in college. And I've seen it live IRL, so she's not compositing the photos. Nor does she have the skills or inclination to spend money on getting it done 😂

I did see an IG post where people were defending Catherine on this exact point, so there's still hope that some people are still using their brains the way they were intended to be used 🙏


About Sunday, this is probably going to be a bit long so I'll put it in a spoiler, but it involves the Sugar-y exhibition organiser so not off-topic 🤭

For those who don't know/don't remember, on Sunday I participated in an event which used to be jointly organised by Nice Organiser and Sugar-y Organiser (she follows #smegsy on IG, which makes 100% sense), until they recently had a falling out. NO went on to quietly organise the event (her family owns the copyright etc), while Sugar set up her own event with a similar name and keeps sending out negative PR about NO - it makes up 99% of her communication about her event.

On Sunday there were some changes in stall allocation, but I got a very nice space, so I started setting up. Problem #1 started with tables in front of me who were trying to block access to mine (a couple of them also had artworks). NO fought with them and got them to unblock the access, but they blocked it again as soon as she moved elsewhere. The pattern repeated all day. Problem #2 I had a severe allergy attack but couldn't find my SOS medication so had to wait till mum brought me some. Problem #3 next-door neighbours took advantage of my depleted state to encroach on my space and repeatedly knock over my display even though I politely kept telling them to refrain. Mum finally came and screamed some sense into them so 🤷 For most part of the day either people were blocked from coming to our side, or they would be very rude about not being interested in seeing what we had on display, or making fun of our work. It's a pretty classy location with a high-end crowd so that was shocking.

Later a table opened up in a better location so we happily moved. The rude behaviour from the visitors and some of the (many) new exhibitors continued. It was like being in an alternate universe. Most of us regular exhibitors were almost in tears by the end of the day. I was spiralling badly on Monday and Tuesday because mum kept implying that my work wasn't interesting enough and outright criticised a new series of paintings (she prefers only her style of painting).

So here comes the fun part. While I was talking to one of my co-exhibitors yesterday, we were discussing the event and people, and what the other regular co-exhibitors had shared with us, and we came to the conclusion that the Sugar had sent her friends (some of them were familiar) to be rude and upset us so we all would abandon NO like many others had done. A lot of people hadn't participated citing children's exams, but many were trying to avoid taking a side/offending the Sugar.

Since she couldn't keep the branding etc, she decided to destroy the event completely. The second I realised that I was kicking myself for being a Tattler yet not realising what was happening 🤦

Thankfully I'm feeling much better today, and will likely make champagne candles tonight 😂
 
  • Like
  • Heart
  • Wow
Reactions: 31
Freakish attention to detail but walks around in creased clothing? I don’t think so woman!!

She also didn’t bother to spend freakish attention to detail to learn the British National anthem, for which she vowed to represent, and she didn’t know if it was the George V or George VI convention that outlined title birth right. Such freakish attention to detail. Lol!

The Duchess of Sussex was clearly aware of the protocol.
She referred in the interview to a "George V or George VI convention" that would mean her son Archie would become a prince "when Harry's dad becomes king".
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Heart
Reactions: 37
Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.