DM: Meghan Markle’s reducing her publicity because of ‘Operation Princess’

A post shared by Vanities (@vfvanities) on

This was what I was waiting for, ever since Meghan Markle’s Vanity Fair cover came out last week. I was waiting for the Daily Mail’s long-read analysis on what it all means and when we can expect the engagement announcement. Say what you will about the Daily Mail – and obviously, it’s a trashy tabloid with a stupid agenda – but they have great royal reporting. I knew that the DM would have a scoop and they totally have one. You can read the full piece here. Some highlights:

The engagement announcement is coming. The DM writes that following the Cambridges’ baby announcement, “another announcement is being quietly prepared behind the gates of Kensington Palace. Today The Mail on Sunday can reveal that officials are drawing up what they consider to be an inevitable announcement – of an engagement between Prince Harry and the American actress who has been by his side for more than a year…The couple’s first official public appearance together is expected at the Invictus Games in Toronto later this month.”

Charles and Camilla like her. Meghan “has met her prospective in-laws, the Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall, and is said to have made a good impression.” Ms Markle’s meeting with Charles and Camilla is felt to be particularly significant. ‘Harry’s father is just keen for him to settle down and be happy,’ says a source. ‘Both Charles and Camilla are understood to have held back from expressing views, keen that Harry should have his own space to make his own decision.’ One palace insider said: ‘Harry was nervous of introducing Meghan to them because he did not want people to jump to conclusions about someone he deeply cared for. He wanted to consider in his own time whether or not she might have a permanent place in his life.’

Changes afoot to the royal household: “Significant changes are even afoot within the palace itself, changes which will open up the possibility of a new family home at Apartment 9 for Harry and Meghan. They currently stay in Nottingham Cottage, a small two-bedroom house in the palace grounds. It has become clear that Royal solicitors Harbottle & Lewis, which acts for Prince Charles, William and Harry, has been asked to represent Meghan, too. And it is understood that Kensington Palace has been playing a key role in reducing the actress’s publicity commitments to the TV legal drama Suits, an apparent clearing of the decks and part of what some are calling ‘Operation Princess’.

The stalled announcement: The Mail on Sunday has learned that they have stalled an official announcement, fearing it would overshadow the 20th anniversary of Princess Diana’s death. Harry, along with his brother, has been a figurehead for a summer of national remembrance and celebration of his mother’s legacy. Now, however, with the key date past, he is free to confirm that Miss Markle will become his wife. This is expected to become clear at the Invictus Games on September 23, where the two will appear together for the first time at a public engagement.

What the Queen thinks.
“Royal protocol makes it unlikely that Meghan will meet the Queen until the official engagement announcement.” Meghan’s VF cover “ had been sanctioned by Prince Harry and Kensington Palace, but is said to have been greeted with surprise and dismay by Buckingham Palace.

The palace thinks Meghan has some skeletons in her closet: “There is every prospect that both the Prince and senior courtiers must resign themselves to a future in which unexpected and unwelcome revelations emerge from the US.”

[From The Daily Mail]

Operation Princess is a dumb name. Then again, I love it when operational names are fun or hardcore. They could have called it Operation Yankee Viper or Operation Sparkle Markle or a million other things. Royal courtiers have no imagination. Anyway, none of this is brand new information or speculation. Most of us (me!) assumed that Harry and Meg were waiting until after the Invictus Games in Toronto for the announcement. Most of us assumed that the actual proposal has already happened and that Meghan is currently being managed by the royal family. Still, it’s good to hear that the Daily Mail has heard all of that from the courtiers too.

A post shared by Vanity Fair (@vanityfair) on

Photos courtesy of Vanity Fair’s Instagram.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

263 Responses to “DM: Meghan Markle’s reducing her publicity because of ‘Operation Princess’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. sensible says:

    Love her freckles, and being Canadian is a nice touch too!

  2. BooRadley says:

    So is she being written off suits? I haven’t seen any of this season? But up this point she has been little more than window dressing. Hey storylines, if you can even call therm that, have been inconsequential and mainly just help to drive Mike’s storylines further.

    • Nic919 says:

      She hasn’t been on screen much and they seem to be setting up a story line that she will work with her dad. Also, the marriage plans to Mike have been put on hold to “focus on her career”. And related to that there have been few scenes between Mike and Rachel and no love scenes.
      It’s really pretty obvious that she is being phased off the show.

    • Dana says:

      I tried watching the show just for her, and I thought it was pretty bad. I actually think she’s a good actress – she made me give a shit about her character, even though her character is a vapid clothes horse who is supposedly really smart, but throws pouty tantrums about taking exams? Ugh, no thanks. The show itself didn’t quite work for me, either. Harvey is a class A jerk and whoever the main kid is was cute but the idea that he is such a brilliant attorney is laughable considering he “demonstrated” that by knowing ONE pre-law basic rule of law that even the worst attorney wouldn’t have overlooked. I can’t believe the show has had so many seasons, because it’s probably the worst legal drama I’ve ever seen. That one guy was super funny, though, whatever his name was.

      • emma33 says:

        I watched a few episodes the other day, just to see Meghan, and yeah, it was pretty bad. The chemistry between the characters wasn’t great and the writing was really trite. I watched 3 eps and gave up. Meghan isn’t a bad actress, but she wasn’t given much to work with.

      • cara says:

        She’s a model/actress, you know the type…… one step from a hooker.

      • Ain'tNoTelling says:

        @Cara: Gosh, you sound like an awful, awful person. I am so grateful to not have a person like you in my life. I have a feeling you are hurtful to most people who might still be in your life.

      • Fiorucci says:

        Good points Dana. I watched a couple seasons it’s ok but trite is the perfect word thanks
        Not sure I’ll ever finish it

      • CynicalAnn says:

        @Aint-pretty sure Cara was joking. You know-like stuffy, old fashioned people would think acting is almost like being a hooker.

      • magnoliarose says:

        I hope this is true otherwise geesh.

      • Ravensdaughter says:

        Stuffy, old fashioned people like the Queen and her staff, you mean. “There is every prospect that both the Prince and senior courtiers must resign themselves to a future in which unexpected and unwelcome revelations emerge from the US.” Oh please, get your own house in order! What about the sleazy Duke of York?

        I’m sure by normal Western standards-not those of the Queen and her geezers-Meghan has nothing to hide!

    • Lama Bean says:

      I’m pretty sure this is the last season of Suits. Also, it was a much better show when Gina Torres was on there.
      I think Louis is the guy you are talking about. He’s funny. Show was originally meant to be a dramedy anyway, I think.

      • Royalsparkle says:

        Suits boss s…… especially that they used her and her status of becoming royal for the VF mag cover…100 serirs!? something like this.

        HRH Peincess Henry waiting needs none of that. Applaud Sparkle showing dark frumpy dark regular lazy waity kannot how regal royal chic is done!

    • Island_girl says:

      They have plenty of racist Trump lovers in Canada too.

    • Talie says:

      If she is winding down on Suits, the announcement of her departure will not come until after the engagement is official…to not cause speculation.

    • frankly says:

      The first couple seasons were fun and had some sharp dialogue. Then every week became WHO WILL FIND OUT MIKE’S SECRET AND OF THESE THREE CHARACTERS WHO WILL STAB WHO IN THE BACK AND HOW WILL IT JEOPARDIZE THE FIRM! Like, go to court or something, people. And eventually we would make bets on which character would utter a slight variation of, “If they think they are going to blah blah this firm while I’m here, THEY ARE OUT OF THEIR GOD DAMN MIND!” Every. episode. someone was out of their gd mind. It got lazy.

  3. SoulSPA says:

    Honk honk! I shall await 23rd September with a lot keenness (is that a word??) to see if any of DM’s speculations had a glimpse of truth. Why do I feel that I want Harry to be happy? Oh goodie!

    • Liberty says:

      Me too! Honk!

      “Operation Princess,” breathed Mrs. Moneyshanks into her mobile, her voice quivering with the same firmness that can make a girl wait ten years for a reward. “Write that down, tell the other pressers! Lets the masses know this little stick of American sequins is so far from the Queen’s hem, she has to be stirred and baked into something royal, unlike me own Kitty what was raised since a tot on Prince Bill posters and kilt skirts and given’ the poshes the knee, oi! Me Kitty was a taxi duchess, all her life, all the class a full-paid Ibiza education and the High Street can offer! We read the Diana book 20 times together! This one, look at her! Oh, she can talk, and sashay about in her yoga bottoms, but let’s see her try to wear a coat as a dress! You don’t learn that over a fortnight, my lads! Even if she did use Canadian witchcraft and snow spells to pull my vulnerable Henry from the potential side of me bold little raisin of a baby girl ! So we must let our commoners know she is starting from scratch! I’ll invictus the smile right off her face if she even looks at a tiara! Oi, add that her mum’s not even planning on livin’with them’ or wearing a signet, so I sent her a galley of me new upcoming book, How To Be A Queen’s Mum & Guide A Monarchy. Princess material indeed!”

    • Royalsparkle says:

      Millions will tune in especially for Prince Henry sparkle couple. An engagement next week – before would be greater.

  4. Skylark says:

    Skeletons? What possible skeletons could emerge that would be damaging? Particularly when her husband-to be is hardly scandal-free…

    • Mrs. WelenMelon says:

      Keen skeletons. American skeletons. Freckled skeletons in suits with matching handbags and fascinators. All kinds skeletons.

    • Bettyrose says:

      IKR? She’s a 36 year old American divorcee from non-Anglo ancestry, but none of that is closeted info. There are gonna be skeletons coming out of someone’s closet, but probably not Meghan’s.

      • Nic919 says:

        Kinda like Uncle Gary.

      • Megan says:

        The BRF would like nothing more than for their “wild child” Harry to get married, settled down, and never again be photographed naked. Unless there are actual skeletons in her closet, they are 100% behind this.

      • bettyrose says:

        Megan – Exactly! Meghan might not fit the mold of a traditional RF wife, but she seems like a known quantity who is likely to continue bringing out the best in Harry. There is no drama to be had here.

      • BritAfrica says:


        “She’s a 36 year old American divorcee from non-Anglo ancestry, but none of that is closeted info.”

        Err….isn’t Markle’s father from an ‘Anglo’ ancestry meaning that she is too….albeit half so?

      • bettyrose says:


        I can’t find a reference online, but I thought her father was Jewish? Certainly, one can be Jewish and of English-speaking origins, but in royal circles “Anglo” specifically refers to Anglo-Saxon Protestant, if I understand correctly.

      • PrincessK says:

        Well I am betting that the genealogists will discover that she is either a distant relative of Harry, Diana or Charles or some other royal because 33 times removed we are ALL cousins!

      • magnoliarose says:

        No she isn’t Jewish nor is her father Jewish. There are a lot of biracial Jews in LA but she isn’t one of them. Quincy Jones’ beautiful children are and went to Hebrew school. It was a rumor. My grandmother thought it was true and said, “Oh a Jewish Duchess and she’s not a Rothschild.” She wasn’t sold so now she says, “Ha I told you.”

      • grumpy says:

        Lots of British people aren’t Anglo, including the native British who are of celtic origin.

    • Sharon Lea says:

      One thing is probably the half-sister that wrote a book and seems hell bent on constantly bashing her.

      • Skylark says:

        But she doesn’t have any credibility precisely because of the petty nature of what she’s said to date. She just comes across as bitter and begrudging. I don’t think anyone is going to take any notice of anything she has to say.

    • Talie says:

      You know the British press has been digging for over a year now and the worst they’ve found is a few stories about half-siblings and her father’s debts. Big whoop…there’s worse on his side

      • Merritt says:

        And the oh so scandalous pictures of her mom doing laundry at a laundromat. The lengths they are going to is ridiculous. Her mom should not be stalked.

    • PrincessK says:

      Exactly what skeletons could Meghan’s parents have compared to those in the cupboard of the House of Windsor. Yes, the pictures published of her mother quietly going to the launderette were followed by the most despicable comments.

    • Royalsparkle says:

      There are scandals and then some – looking back i see more immature adventurer than scandal. Monaco prince/ess seem more ‘then some’ scandal.

    • Sarah says:

      American skeletons. Divorced skeletons. A British Prince, one of the favorites, marrying a non-Brit will not go over well in Britain.
      And if you believe this article, Meghan has NOT yet met the Queen but many here believed a story that she had and called those who questioned it “trolls” or “Tumblr stans” when they were probably right.
      And Buckingham Palace was surprised and dismayed, just like I and others said. They would never have given permission for a VF story. Seems like the evil trolls and stans were right.

  5. Seraphina says:

    A small two bed room apt in the Royal grounds? That’s funny.

    And of course she has skeletons in her closet. We all do, unless you pluck your princess up at a tender young age like they did with Di. And then they make their own skeletons as they mature. And let’s be honest, if Kate keeps making babies, Harry won’t be king unless Will steps to the side. And I don’t see it happening because his ego won’t let him. Now if the public is so unhappy with him and Chutney, that’s a different situation.

    I’m very keen to see how Chutney will interact with her new sister in law. Something tells me MM doesn’t give a rats a$$ and that will be great entertainment. Hang in there Kate, you can always make babies and Chutney: Keen Kate’s Chutney.

    • Ankhel says:

      The throne goes from parent (Charles) to first born child (William). If he can’t /won’t succeed, his first born inherits instead. Aka, George. If George’s out, without kids, there would be Charlotte. Harry’s number five in line, and every descendant William gets increases that number. Harry will never, ever be king now.

      • Seraphina says:

        I completely forgot about the kids! Wow. Thanks. I had a complete brain fart this morning. A history major forgetting line of succession. Ugh.

      • graymatters says:

        The only way Harry would be king would be in case of a horrific, fatal accident in which William and all his children die. But that would be so awful that GB might rethink the idea of a monarchy.

      • PrincessK says:

        I don’t think so, the monarchy would continue with Harry and his children, why not? His children will eventually be senior royals anyway.

      • bluhare says:

        actually, but then, they won’t, PrincessK. They’ll be akin to Beatrice and Eugenie. Hopefully with more of an aim in life.

      • suze says:

        @bluhare, like Beatrice/Eugenie, Zara Tindall, Peter Phillips, David Linley and Sarah Chatto. LIke all of those people, Harry’s children may have no role at all in royal life.

        Perhaps they will be even less visible since Will and Kate will have at least three children – more than enough to fill the senior royal positions.

        By the time you get to Harry’s grandchildren, they will definitely be out of royal life. Williams children, and his grandchildren through George, on the other hand, will be senior royals and high profile.

      • Merritt says:

        If his kids are working royals, then they will hopefully be like the Gloucesters.

      • perplexed says:

        A lot of the “prestige” Harry has seems to come from being Diana’s son. Everyone remembers the little boy that walked behind his mother’s coffin.

        As Harry and William grew up, no one seemed to care about Andrew anymore. And then there’s Edward, the prince nobody ever seemed to talk about even when he was single. Once George and all other kids start growing up, Harry’s fame and importance could diminish, except maybe during Diana anniversaries.

        In a weird way, marrying an actress would probably help him retain some level of fame if people stop caring that he’s half-Diana.

      • PrincessK says:

        Do remember that the Queen had four kids and Charles had only two, so in order to share out royal duties, I see Harry’s children having to do a fair share if the monarchy wants to continue to have a national and international role, they are patrons of hundreds of charities. Williams kids alone will not be able to do it all.

      • magnoliarose says:

        The ones that aren’t heavily involved seem to be the most adjusted and happiest, so it is probably for the best. I wouldn’t want that life.

      • suze says:

        Princess K, by the time you get to the generation you are talking about, it will be William’s three kids versus however how many Harry has. If they get through the Harry/William generation without parceling out royal duties to Beatrice and Eugenie, Louise and James, then they can certainly manage with just William’s children.

      • Where'sMyTiara says:

        James II’s line was passed over and the Stuart line became the Hanoverian line.
        Crises of personality (and law) happen, and the primogeniture as practised in the past is not absolute. The benefits of an unwritten Constitution.

      • Helen Smith says:

        With the winnowing down of the monarchy to the heir and his children Harry and his children will be pushed farther to the margins of royal work as William’s children grow up. It already is happening to Harry as not all of his appearances are counted so he doesn’t outshine William and Kate.

        Harry might be happy to see himself farther and farther from the center of royal life. He has said that he has no interest in being King.

    • Sarah says:

      Why does everyone think that Meghan wont care what Kate or the other royals think about her? This is an adult woman, with a career, and a life in another country who is willing to drop it all, her career and including where she lives, for a man she has been very long distance dating for about a year.
      Sounds to me like Meghan cares quite a lot about the Royal Family…seems to be her goal.

  6. IlsaLund says:

    “The palace thinks Meghan has some skeletons in her closet: “There is every prospect that both the Prince and senior courtiers must resign themselves to a future in which unexpected and unwelcome revelations emerge from the US.”

    What “revelations” exactly do they think are going to come out? Nude photos? Bad credit history? What??? I would think Meghan’s background has been thoroughly investigated by now.

    • BeamMeUpScottie says:

      Well, her ex hubby has allegedly been offered big bucks for a tell-all, but surely that would reflect poorly on him, not her??? I know whose side I would take!

      Anyway, my favourite sentence in the Mail article was that Palace lawyers for PC, Wills and H are now acting for Meghan. 😉
      Good to know she now has this kind of firepower behind her.

      • whatever says:

        BeamMeUpScottie – How would it reflect badly on her ex-husband? He was the other person in the marriage and if he wants to share his side of the story he is perfectly entitled to do so, especially if he knows there are inaccuracies in how the marriage split was portrayed in the media.

        Credit should be given where it is due – he could have made millions from selling his story when her relationship with Harry was revealed but he didn’t. He has been quit since they split.

      • Merritt says:


        When Meghan’s whiny sister tried to come out with some nonsense about how Meghan doesn’t support her, it reflected badly on the sister. Especially once people brought out the receipts on the sister’s daughter tweeting racist stuff. It became clear why there is estrangement between the two.

        Maybe there is no interesting story to tell. Most divorces are pretty boring.

      • whatever says:

        @ Merritt, – true, but if her ex-husband has receipts of how the marriage split went down (if its different to the version being peddled to the public) then it won’t reflect badly on him will it?

      • Merritt says:


        Depends. You seem to want t push the idea that something big and dramatic happened. Sometimes there is nothing to bring the receipts on.

      • bluhare says:

        That depends why he does it, whatever. If he releases his version to make some money and cast aspersions about her right as she’s getting married, I think that reflects very poorly. If he had concerns about her (and even if he did what business is it of his now?), then those should be been addressed early on.

        And I guess I’m curious why you think that her ex husband would do something like that anyway.

      • Merritt says:


        Because whatever always has something negative to say about Meghan. There is isn’t even an official version of the divorce that Meghan has put out. It doesn’t seem to be something she has discussed in any detail. Any claims about why her first marriage ended are speculation. A lot of people conveniently forget that Queen Letizia was married to a guy for a short time and divorced before she dated Felipe. Some similar situations in some ways too, since they had dated for several years before getting married and then the marriage was very short.

      • whatever says:

        @Merritt – I actually really like Meghan and have been a fan of her since Suits started. Why is it so wrong for me to have an opinion different to all the surgery stuff written here?

        There are people on here that really can’t handle if someone has a different opinion/perspective and there is a general consensus that Meghan is the second coming of Christ. There is nothing wrong with someone willing to take the rose tinted glasses off and give a different view point.

      • Merritt says:


        It is not about a difference of opinion. You are pushing negativity based on your own feelings not on fact. Instead of just owning that, you are instead making things up. You claimed there was a version of her divorce story being peddled to the public. The problem is that is not true. There has been speculation from the tabloids in their quest to dig up dirt. The issue that that Meghan doesn’t seem to have spoken about the reasons of the divorce, so there is no version that she is trying to sell.

      • PrincessK says:

        I somehow doubt that her idiot half sister will release any book. I believe that this stupid woman has been sat on and made to see the light, and if any book does emerge it will be a sweet ‘My Little sister the Princess’ type of thing.

      • magnoliarose says:

        She doesn’t even know her sister. She didn’t grow up with her so whatever she had to say would be questionable.

    • whatever says:

      I’m not trying to push any idea. BeamMeUpScottie has already stated that s/he will take her side despite not knowing what the ex-hubby will say ,if he will say anything at all. I’m just pointing out that him doing an interview wouldn’t automatically reflect badly on him. Like I said before he was the other person in the marriage and if he talks we will get a more well rounded picture of their relationship which is not necessarily a bad thing.

      • bluhare says:

        I still don’t know why we need to know about their marriage, whatever. It was their marriage, not ours.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Why should we have any right to a “well rounded picture” about a relationship that took place between two private citizens years ago?

      • Carol says:

        Seriously? We are on a gossip site. Of course it isn’t our “right” to know what happened in her first marriage, but it hasn’t stopped those from clamoring to know what happened on Brad and Angelina’s plane ride or whether Katie and Jamie were “just friends” or actually dating or any other myriad of stories here.

      • whatever says:

        @ General curiosity I guess, there always is with the royals. You can blame Diana and the rise of celebrity for that.

        @notasugarhere- If Meghan is going down in the history books you may as well get both points of view/sides of the story rather than just one side given out by her PR people. She will be a public figure so a investigation of her past will be expected and if she doesn’t like it then she is in the wrong profession because media do it to all high profile people.

      • notasugarhere says:

        If we were talking, say, Eleanor of Aquitane, with her marriage to one king and then another, looking at the first marriage would be more in line.

        An investigation of her past ie. work history. But her personal relationships as a private citizen and what transpired in those relationships? Her first marriage remains none of our business, just as Letizia’s first marriage is none of our business.

        whatever, why didn’t you direct this to bluhare too, seeing as we basically said the same thing?

      • Merritt says:


        The issue is that Meghan has been investigated. The tabloids have worked hard to find something truly juicy. So far there is nothing other than molehills being turned into mountains by certain people.

      • whatever says:

        @notasugarhere – the media doesn’t follow rules. If they want to investigate and speculate about her private life then they can. If other celebrities have their passed relationship’s brought up to the forefront again why do you think Meghan deserves special treatment?. She’s a celebritity and possibly as soon to be Royal – thats a double whammy. It comes with the territory.

        Please don’t act like she is being hard done by. It was she who decided to become a celebrity nobody forced her. I also never said her ex-husband will talk I merely stated that if he wanted to he can because the marriage wasn’t exclusively Meghan’s it was his marriage too.

      • bluhare says:

        The things I think would make a difference are if she has a history of being cruel or abusive, and/or has extreme views (like, really extreme, not just ultra liberal or conservative). Other than that, I can’t think of anything that would impact her marrying Harry.

      • whatever says:

        bluhare- I don’t recall ever saying that her previous marriage will have an impact on whether Harry marries her or not. Others have said it but not me. This original topic wasn’t about that.

      • Marr says:

        Sure, from a gossip pov, her ex-husband talking to the press wouldn’t be such a bad thing. However, it WOULD reflect badly on him because it would be an extremely low classy thing to do. Taking money to discuss the intimacies of his private relationship with her? I would absolutely give him the side-eye. Besides, receipts represent hard evidence. So unless there’s photos or recordings that he could leak (and get into a whole load of legal trouble for it), it would just be a he said/she said mess.

      • bluhare says:

        whatever, but you are talking about her ex husband talking about their marriage. I guess I don’t see the point. And if you don’t think it will have an impact why are you even bringing it up? I don’t understand that.

      • magnoliarose says:

        The ex was offered money, and he turned it down. Either he has something he doesn’t want to be exposed or he just doesn’t have bad feelings toward her. I just don’t think she is particularly scandalous. She’s not perfect certainly, but awful skeletons in her closet seem far fetched.

    • whatever says:

      bluhare – I didn’t bring it up another poster did.

  7. Izzy says:

    Skeletons in HER closet?? The BRF lives in that glass castle, they should not throw stones.

  8. Suzr says:

    The royal skeletons clank more loudly than any so I am sure the courtiers can handle Meghan’s.

    I fear the Elvi might be a tad later than I wanted, however May or June will be nicer weather for their descent.

    • Skylark says:

      I wanted a Winter one, deep in dark and cozy December, with snow on the ground and the bride in blood red velvet.

      • Suzr says:

        I don’t think they are on that timeline, but who knows, if they are as modern as they say maybe a two or three month engagement is in order.

      • Bellagio DuPont says:

        I would be surprised if they had a long engagement for 2 reasons:

        1) she’s no spring chicken……they need to get on the baby rollercoaster sooner rather than later (we know he’s ready)
        2) more importantly for security reasons. Especially because she has so many **’s to her, especially racially, I can imagine that they will always be facing higher levels of security risk than other members of BRF. So, I think it makes more sense to have a hyper short engaged t to lower the planning window for any potential threats.

        But who knows, we’ll see.

  9. DiamondGirl says:

    Nice – get some good American blood into the family!

    Who cares about her past – there was a huge topless photo scandal with Sophie before she married Edward and she’s been a lovely addition to the family all these years since.

    I think this will be similar to the Swedish princess Sofia – how terrible and common she was but she turned out to be sweet and is popping out adorable babies.

  10. Fa says:

    Her life will be control the day they get engagement by BP.

  11. BeamMeUpScottie says:

    Oh my! I Such exciting news! There are no ends of Meghan and Harry ‘exclusives’ this weekend. And there is an update every two hours, it seems.
    Loved Camilla Tominey’s piece in today’s Express ,

    Also Roya Nikka’s article in the Sudnay Times:
    Headline: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle drop hints of wedding
    Harry & Meghan may plan “a more modern kind of royal marriage” she won’t be”an Identikit duchess” @thesundaytimes

    Celia Walden did a very interesting piece in Saturday’s Telegraph a well.

    And finally for a really good assesment, see a piece by Australria’s Daily Telegraph.

  12. Louise says:

    I dont think Charles and Camilla are in any position to comment on the suitability of anyone else!

  13. Heidi says:

    It’s good to see that Charles has learned from his fahter’s mistake and is not putting any pressure on Harry either way. The Queen however – has she not learned anything from Diana’s misery? Not even bothering to MEET Meghan? I would have thought that this time around, she would like to make sure BEFORE the wedding that a future princess is the right match for her husband AND the royals. Just – unbelievable.

    I think Elizabeth II had better dress warm – this woman is not a wannabe British aristocrat like Kate who likes the status quo, she will be more like hurricane Irma – nothing will ever be the same again. Only difference to Diana: She will actually have the support of her husband. Maybe Queenie had better evacuate to Balmoral – permanently.

    • Suzr says:

      The Queen knew Diana as well as anyone outside her own circle and that was the most disastrous royal marriage in the last 50 years.

      I doubt the Queen meeting Meghan beforehand will have much to do with the success of the marriage.

    • DiamondGirl says:

      Her judgment of someone isn’t flawless considering that three of her four offspring have been divorced.

    • minx says:

      I took it more that, after what happened with Diana, the Queen is allowing Harry to make his own marital choices (within reason, of course).

    • Bridget says:

      What exactly do you think Meghan is going to do?

    • Alexandria says:

      A hurricane? Don’t get me wrong, I love reading about Markle and she seems lovely and hardworking, but she is an average, hardworking woman with a career, who does charity work. There are readers here like me, who do not feel she is the second coming of Diana or JC (some do), but they like her because she seems different but still seems harmless and normal. If she makes Harry happy, good enough. There are normal, hardworking, non-celeb ladies who contribute to society the same way. All good. Nothing to suggest yet that she would rock the boat like Diana. In fact, maybe she’s content to be like Sophie as long as she gets to be with Harry, which is perfectly fine. Let’s see how it goes, I guess. I don’t get all these expectations on her. All we need from BRF are photo ops, empathy and charity work numbers. Having style while doing them, is a plus.

      • Idky says:

        I agree, MM is your basic, average person and so far appears to be more interesting than KM but let’s be clear about this – she does not walk on water like a lot of people make her out to and she is not Mother Teresa. At the end of the day, there are a lot of women out there exactly like her. College grad, working, doing charity/contributing to society, etc….

      • Suze says:

        I suspect that Markle will be hard working and a popular draw. She may establish a foundation of her own or work with Harry on some of his causes, but she’ll also have to do her share of the bread and butter royal tasks. The glitzy international stuff is nice, but it’s not the reason the royal family is there. Appearing around Britain doing more mundane appearances is what keeps the monarchy ticking.

        I also suspect that she will go along to get along, at least as far as internal politics go.

        But I know some Celebitchies want to see a hurricane in action, causing uproar and upending everything. Not sure that is what Markle herself envisions.

      • bluhare says:

        I agree Suze, and I hope we’re right!

      • notasugarhere says:

        That’s what I see her doing too. Work ethic, do your share, follow the family rules, implement your own nonprofit on the side.

      • Liberty says:

        I agree with Suze, too. Working, living her life, trying to help where she can.

      • BritAfrica says:

        Ditto what Suze said.

      • magnoliarose says:

        She doesn’t seem rebellious and she loved doing humanitarian work even before she met Harry so that will most likely be what they do.

    • whatever says:

      Meghan a hurricane? nah don’t think so. The men in grey suits will allow her to do non- controversial charity work and stuff but she will be kept firmly in her lane so there is no Diana 2.0.

      • Lady D says:

        They can try to keep her in her lane, but as I recall they tried the same thing with Lady Di. They will also be dealing with a husband who will be front and center to protect her. That’s a new one for the grey men.

      • suze says:

        @ Lady D

        But why would Meghan go rogue? It makes no sense. Diana was “out of her lane” because her unhappy marriage drove her to do things no other royal did.

        Presumably Meghan loves Harry and wants to join the family firm to do some good in the world. It makes no sense that she would want to start upending and shaking things up.

      • Lady D says:

        I don’t actually think she will go rogue, suze. I was responding to the idea of Meghan doing what she’s told to do for the rest of her life by the anonymous, scary grey men of the palace. I’d like to think she has more independence than that.

    • PrincessK says:

      I am pretty sure the Queen has met Meghan. The Palace actually reveals very little of what goes on behind closed doors and rightly so. The Queen meets lots of people and we don’t hear about it.

  14. ArchieGoodwin says:

    Operation Sparkle Markle.


  15. Merritt says:

    I would guess that Charles liked her from the moment she said the words “organic food”.

    Now we are just waiting for an announcement and to see what type of ring Harry gave Meghan.

    • BeamMeUpScottie says:

      Lol. Not to mention when she mentions how cupping and acupuncture have worked for her. He is a passionate believer in homeopathy, much to the dismay of the medical estalishment here.

      • J says:

        Homeopathy has nothing to do with organic food or naturopathy. Homeopathy is distinct in the sense that it offers remedies which are ultra-diluted doses of a plant, mineral or other substance. Natural medicine leans more towards using the plant as a whole (tea, tincture etc).

    • Suze says:

      I suspect Charles likes, and will like, Meghan very well. They would seem to have some things in common, organic food first among them.

      Both also seem to have thoughtful natures.

      I know nothing of course but I suspect this coupling is much less controversial inside the family than it is in the gutter press.

      • The Original Mia says:

        I agree, Suze. As Harry is closer to Charles, so will Meghan. Especially as they have some things in common that they can talk about. Wouldn’t surprise me to see Meghan doing more engagements with her future in-laws than KM.

      • Liberty says:

        I agree with your thought process, Suze.

      • PrincessK says:

        I think that the entry of Meghan will allow Charles to fulfil more of a role of ‘father in law’ and hopefully ‘granddad’ because I doubt if Meghan’s parents will move to the UK and take over like the Middleton’s did.

      • CynicalAnn says:

        @PrincessK: I totally agree. Their children will be much closer to Charles and Camilla. But I’m sure her mom will visit a lot. And we’ll be treated to a lot of crappy DM stories about her mom being right out of Compton and close to the holy BRF.

  16. Lala says:

    She will never be a princess. Only girls born royal get that title. She will be a duchess.

    • whatever says:

      Except for Kate when she becomes the Princess of Wales. People/ journalists will refer to her as “The Princess” for short just like they did for Diana. But Meghan, if she marries will always be a Duchess which is why I don’t get why she is so eager to marry in to this family. If I have to give up everything i’ve worked for and become a submissive person I sure as hell would want the Princess of Wales title as compensation and be referred to as a Princess and not just a lowly Duchess.

      • Lala says:

        True, but not sure Kate will use that title out of respect for Will/Diana (after that, I think the title will be resuable but mother-in-law who you never got to meet because she tragically died still seems too close). I bet she will still prefer to be called the Duchess of Cambridge. Camilla doesn’t use the title for obvious reasons.

        I don’t think the technicality of the title bothers Meghan 😉

      • whatever says:

        @Lala – I think Kate will use the Princess of Wales title once William becomes POW, I don’t think William will stop her from taking the title. Kate doesn’t incite the same kind of fury as Camilla does so she should be fine to use it.

      • Merritt says:

        Yeah. I mean what was the Queen Mother thinking when she married the Duke of York. She had no idea at the time she would ever get to upgrade to Queen. And poor Sophie being just a Countess.

      • Suze says:

        @LaLa – if Kate doesn’t use Princess of Wales I will eat my tiara.

        I am sure William will insist, for one thing. He is apparently quite conscious of his standing ( for a normal bloke)

      • whatever says:

        @ Merritt, to be fair the Queen Mother wasn’t that eager to marry in to the Royal family, it look 3 proposals for her to say yes to Bertie! . She was also well aware that marrying in to the BRF would mean the loss of her freedom, she was realistic. But at the same time she had nothing to lose in marrying Bertie as an aristocratic girl her life’s purpose was to marry well and have a family. Its different for a modern career women because they have to give up so much.

        Re Sophie – she knew when marrying that her Countess title would eventually be upgraded to Duchess of Edinburgh, at least she is guaranteed an upgrade. Sophie is also not in competition with her sister-in-laws because one is dead and the other is divorced and no longer part of the family. Its just different dynamics for Sophie.

        @Suze – agree, there is a greater chance of seeing pigs fly than Kate says no to the Princess of Wales title haha!

      • bluhare says:

        Oh, Kate will use that title. I’m going to agree with Suze here too. William will demand it, but I think Kate has title ambitions of her own.

      • bluhare says:

        whatever, there are some who think Elizabeth kept refusing George because she really wanted Edward. Privacy wasn’t near the issue back then that it is now.

      • notasugarhere says:

        bluhare, given the stories of her wild-for-her-time demeanor? The idea of her wanting life-of-the-party Edward instead of staid Bertie aren’t too far fetched.

    • Angel says:

      One of her titles will be Princess Henry, though she may not use it if she gets a higher one. Kate is Princess William too.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Yes, just like KM is technically Princess William, Sophie is Princess Edward, Sarah was Princess Andrew. So many people forget that, probably because People magazine insists on using incorrect titles.

    • Mumzy says:

      We shall pass the declaration that henceforth and forevermore we set aside Princess or Duchess or other insufficient titles. “Sparkle Markle” it is…..thank you Kaiser.

    • godwina says:

      “Duchess Meghan.” That sounds … unconvincing somehow.

    • seesittellsit says:

      @Lala, one of the Brit experts like LAK can check me on this, but a royal duchess IS a princess: the title carries an HRH. “Regular” duchesses are “Your Grace”. Kate is HRH the Duchess of Cambridge, Princess of the United Kingdom of Great Britain. As prince in direct line of succession, Harry’s wife, whoever, she is, will be HRH the Duchess of [xxxxxxx]”. A royal duchess carries the rank of princess. So, yes, she will be, just not commonly referred to as one; Kate by contrast will be referred to that way once she becomes Princess of Wales and that becomes her primary title.

    • PrincessK says:

      @Merritt….you say poor Sophie is a lowly Countess. But I believe that once Prince Phillip goes, she will be upgraded to Duchess of Edinburgh.

  17. Freddy Spaghetti says:

    I can’t wait for the official announcement! Also, the DM comments are so mean. It was disheartening to read them.

    • Sharon Lea says:

      The DM comments are terrible. Are the jealous people able to vote more than once? I don’t get the numbers.

      • notasugarhere says:

        DM monkeys with those arrows all the time. When things are going the direction they don’t want, all of the arrows disappear and they start fresh. Also the DM does not moderate or eliminate multiple user names. Some of the most rampant anti-Meghan folks use versions of their same user name, which enables them to take over and derail the comments sections

    • Snowflake says:

      I hate those DM commenters. I go on that site sometimes but I had to get off there last night. Comments were so racist

    • bluhare says:

      To be honest, I have no idea why anyone gives Daily Mail comments the time of day. I read them for entertainment value only. If you read them that way, some of them are pretty funny.

      • suze says:

        I swear they are written by bots.

        Seriously, don’t waste your energy on them if they anger you.

      • PrincessK says:

        Yes, the comments on DM are vile and make me so angry. I have never come acros so many people who are totally sick with jealousy. I spend too much time trawling through DM pointing out racist comments to people who are always denying its about her colour. Yes, there are people on there with multiple profiles. Some of the comments are unbelievable ranging from “How on earth can someone like Meghan attend a ceremony at the Cenotaph” to wicked comments about any possible children will end up as drug addicts. Someone said that Meghan’s blood will introduce sickle cell anaemia and high blood pressure, obesity etc etc.

        The Daily Mail is disgraceful for not moderating the comments but because the click bait articles attract thousands of comments I suspect that they do not have the manpower to moderate and all DM cares about is making money out of the high numbers of people it attracts to its site to make money. The Daily Mail never used to be like this years back, online it is rapidly becoming like the National Enquirer. It is unfortunate that Meghan is entering the UK at a time of Brexit fever. But I do believe that young modern Britain will welcome Meghan with open arms and she will become the most popular member of the RF.

      • PrincessK says:

        @Bluhare….I think the opposite. The DM should be given the time of day, this type of newspaper can be a rabble rouser and seriously manipulate public opinion. As we know people have different levels of intelligence and some go on DM and without any analysis believe some of the well written comments that come straight from trolls and racists. As many of us as possible need to go on there and debunk the nonsense. DM has a very international readership online and I am afraid that the comments really give a false impression of the way the majority of British people think.

      • magnoliarose says:

        There are loads of bots there and trolls. I think some are paid and some are just ignorant. I don’t take them to heart I laugh most of the time, but I read them rarely.

  18. Aerohead21 says:

    Talk about skeletons, yeah!! Harry is far from clean. He has plenty of scandal in his past. Either he’s finally grown up or the PR magic worked because he’s like a totally different person. His lovely spoiled interview was a glimpse of old Harry…just a tiny glimpse…it’s amazing looking back at some of the stuff he did. William was highly favored at the time and Harry was the troublemaker. Now William is a whiny butt and everyone likes Harry.

    • notasugarhere says:

      William’s antics were never reported, most still aren’t, which helps with the Golden Child image.

      • Liberty says:


      • SoulSPA says:

        What antics? Can you give any details? Thanks 🙂

      • Soothie says:

        Uh huh. Got proof of that?
        At least Will was never dumb enough to dress as a nazi.

      • notasugarhere says:

        He was the one who led the way with the partying at Highgrove. Dressing as an “African Native” at the same party, admitted by the shopkeeper and covered up by the press. Stumbling drunk to a car and getting behind the wheel (on video and photos). Killing two different species of endangered birds (covered up, frequently blamed on Harry). Reckless driving through a country estate, chased by the owner of the estate who wanted him caught and held accountable. That’s just the quick list and doesn’t go in to the years of cheating, the Jecca situation, the stairwell “incident” and others. That’s just pre-marriage.

  19. OTHER RENEE says:

    If Harry thinks Meghan would put up with the royal tradition of having other lovers, he’d better think again. No way would this woman tolerate it, Prince or no Prince. Of course I know I’m just guessing but this is a gut feeling.

    • perplexed says:

      She is in Hollywood though. Maybe she’s gotten used to seeing cheating around her. I could see an actress bristling less at cheating than someone in a different kind of profession.

  20. Jessica says:

    I’m not sure why people who hate Kate love Meghan. They seem about the same to me except Meghan has a bit more of a colorful past. Other than that they both don’t mind the spotlight, Meghan clearly enjoys it (she’s an actress), and both clearly love titles and the idea of being a part of a royal family. If Meghan was such an amazing human being she wouldn’t be interested in Prince Harry. The only royal who is attractive and really seems to hold royal clout and mystique is the King of Spain and his daughters, the rest are whatever.

    • hmmm says:

      Meghan works for a living, actually supports herself. She also seems to have interests beyond shopping. Kate is slothful and incurious. Still, I too don’t understand Meghan’s attraction to a trust fund slacker like Harry. If he weren’t a prince, would she even give him a look?

    • bluhare says:

      Gosh; didn’t know she was an actress! Where did you hear that?

      /s off

      From what I’ve seen I like Meghan, and I also don’t hate Kate. I do not think they appear to be the same though. Meghan has been working her adult life, not hanging around waiting for a Prince to propose. She also has had extracurricular ambitions as well, so she doesn’t strike me as someone who sits there waiting for something to happen. So, yes, I like her so far.

      • Suze says:

        Bluhare you are far too reasonable for a gossip site. Seeing admirable qualities in everyone. Tsk tsk,

      • Liberty says:


        I don’t think anyone hates Kate. Speaking for myself only, I am disappointed she’s so disinterested in work, and that she does not seem to want to learn, grow, develop or get busy doing something with her position that could help people, or the world, her country. I went from yay, normal girl to, boo, pampered shopping bag wife making (seemingly, for years now) only the limpest of gestures and only tiptoeing up to “work” when it involves fun stuff, Ben, Harry, preening, and new frocks. Such a waste.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Ditto Liberty, but hate is the word that is always leveled. She appears to have no interest in the world around her, when she campaigned for the role for 10 years. Full-time working royal would be less than 20hpw, with months of vacation time, but neither she nor William care enough about the world around them to care about contributing more.

      • bluhare says:

        But Liberty . . . how is Romina doing? She must be crushed! 😀

      • suze says:

        Gosh, I do miss Watercress Romina. I do hope she is bridesmaid (in one of Liberty’s pieces, although I would scream with laughter if she actually was, in actuality. It would be too convoluted upper class Brit by half.)

      • PrincessK says:

        I certainly don’t hate Kate. But I do wish she would be herself and drop that dreadful fake ‘received pronunciation’ accent which she adopts. I really think she took elocution lessons and failed to master them. She doesn’t say much because she has to think about how she pronounces every word poor thing. Her fake accent is horrible. I think her mother tried far too hard to model her into a tweed and kilt wearing Princess who the Queen would adore. It is so bizarre to hear the Princes speak normally and then Kate comes along with this squeaky faux posh accent. Another reason why Meghan should be herself and keep her normal accent as much as she can while being surrounded by Brits, which may dilute it a bit.

      • magnoliarose says:

        I don’t hate Kate. Hate is reserved for the Tangerine buffoon in the White House. She wastes her life and opportunities. Kate allows her family to use her connections for attention when they have done nothing to deserve it and are less than remarkable people. I think she is the worst thing to happen to the BRF, but it won’t be fully evident until William is king.

    • Merritt says:

      I’m not sure why people feel the need to pin the two women against each other or rip one apart to build up the other. It is unnecessary and plays into daily fail level narratives.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Why was an international banking executive drawn to Prince Pils, known for his heavy drinking, partying, and horrible temper (Maxima and Willem-Alexander)?

      Why was a hard-working, award-winning journalist, and rumored Republican interested in a royal prince? Because that’s who she fell for, in spite of her anti-monarchy leanings. She might have given him the side-eye for his years of dating a swimsuit and lingerie model, but after he asked her out three times she finally agreed to a date. (Letizia and Felipe)

      There are those who fall for the person, even if they surprise themselves when it happens.

      • mimchen says:

        Regarding Letizia, I’m not sure if you follow Spanish gossip sites and forums. I do, and Letizia has had an awful reputation since the beginning. They announced the engagement earlier than planned because the press had discovered the dirt about her and they were going to rip her to shreds. A lot of whitewashing has been going on, from her affair as a teenager to her teacher, whom she would later marry and then abandon, her affairs, nude portraits and rumoured sex tape while working in Mexico, to the fact that she had a live-in boyfriend who was blindsided when she left him for Felipe. There are well substantiated rumours that she worked as an escort and one of the rich guys she serviced introduced her to Felipe. Her fast track career was allegedly due to her affair with a TV executive and later to an effort to make her seem more successful in view of her royal marriage. She was known to her colleagues as Fictizia, which could be translaterd as Liar. There are countless stories about her bad temper, mala leche as the Spanish say, her arrogance, insolence and lack of breeding. She apparently treats her employees terribly and she never fit in with Felipe’s friends and family. Neither did she adapt to the close knit group of European royals, contrary to other princesses and queens. She also insists on working hours from 9 to 5,and week-ends off. And her physical transformation is absolutely stunning. Check her pictures from 2003-2007 and see how she had another face. Anyway, she’s awful and disliked in Spain and Kate is a saint compared to her.

      • suze says:

        @mimchen. So Felipe fell in love with, and has remained married to, a poorly bred, lying, insolent, lazy and bad tempered prostitute. He must be a complete idiot and a really bad person, too, right?

      • notasugarhere says:

        I think mimchen has been reading the lie-filled C-word Spanish language forum. That is where the anti-Letizia brigade lives. That place is to Letizia as Female First is to Angelina Jolie.

      • Merritt says:


        So basically Leticia was in an unhealthy relationship with an adult who used his position of power as a teacher over a teenager. She came to understand it was not good for her and left.

        And wtf is that comment about working a normal schedule?

      • Tina says:

        God, imagine if William and Kate worked from 9-5.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Merritt that is often misinterpreted/mistranslated and proven wrong because she often works nights and weekends. The idea was iirc that she wanted princessing to be a real job that is worked hard, but also to try to maintain a personal life out of the spotlight.

    • Aerohead21 says:

      Yeah I don’t hate any of them actually. I sort of feel sorry for them because it used to mean more than fashion and celebrity to be royal. Now, with the young royals barely breaking a sweat to work, all that’s left is the celebrity…and then they bitch like oh my gosh I want to be normal*

      *and take advantage of all the perks that come with being royal.

      Sorry…unless your plan is to deconstruct the entire royal family and go to a non-royal establishment, maybe you should suck it up that you were born *gasp* with a silver spoon and privilege the a VAST majority of the world will NEVER see.

  21. mimchen says:

    There have been plenty of potential scandals relating to the Middletons and to Kate that have been hushed up by the press. I’m thinking of Kate’s friend the orgy planner, Kate’s summer job in her teens as a yacht girl for super rich men, her stalking of William. Not to mention the murky story of the Middleton money and their company. Uncle Gary’ s dubious dealings, Kate’s rumoured sex tape, Pippa’s rumoured moonlighting as an escort for rich Americans like Andre Balasz, the constant manipulation of the press by the Middleton, and the list goes on an on. Maybe it’s just evil gossip, but the press never really investigated Kate’s past. So it’s disgusting to think that they might try to find dirt on Meghan. I have huge respect for her because she worked hard and she really cares about other people besides her family. I pray she gets her Prince. She’ll make and amazing royal and she’ll put Kate to shame – not that it would be very difficult fore someone with the smallest amount of work ethic.

    • Sharon Lea says:

      Great points, ITA things have been hushed up all these years about Kate, along with William’s partying and the substances. And there is the topic of James and his marshmallow business that lumps along. He moved to Hong Kong for a while to expand it. I felt that they had him go there to get away from the public eye because it didn’t seem to help his business.

    • aquarius64 says:

      I knew about sketchy Uncle Gary but not the rest! Unless Meghan committed a serious crime the queen is certainly on shaky ground to say no to her.

    • perplexed says:

      Why would Kate have needed to be a yacht girl in her teens? That story I don’t get.

      Kate was so young when she met William I believe she would have made sure her individual past was kept clean. In some ways, her path is a little similar to Diana’s in that neither really could have had a past since they were teens when they met their husbands. Even if Kate has a sex tape, the only other participant I could see being on that tape is William.

      • The Original Mia says:

        Kate was no virgin when she met William. That’s the whitewashed version they tried to float during the engagement. There were loud whispers about the Middleton sisters and the sons of the aristocracy. So, no…KM was not Diana. She was experienced. She had past boyfriends.

      • perplexed says:

        Even if she had past boyfriends, that’s still a big leap to yacht girl.

        I don’t like Kate that much, but if it’s true that Carole Middleton had been plotting to get Kate hitched to William, then there’s no way her mom would have let her be a yacht girl. I just can’t see her mom letting her be even slightly loose if she had the aspiration for her daughter to mix in those kinds of circles and marry a prince.

        If these are the kinds of rumours that get spread about women, I suppose it’s no wonder everyone expected Charles had to marry a virgin. It may not be the monarchy that’s backwards. It might be everybody else.

      • Merritt says:

        So like most people then?

      • notasugarhere says:

        She wasn’t a “yacht girl” like in Cannes. She worked briefly as part of the crew/wait staff on a high-end yacht catering to elite men. She was reprimanded by her boss because she insisted upon wearing her shortest short-shorts instead of longer shorts, capris, or trousers like the other staff.

  22. Louise177 says:

    These faux engagement announcements are ridiculous. All of these “experts” keep saying an announcement is coming. When it doesn’t, they keep giving a different date. Also why are people so sure that they are engaged? Haven’t other exes met the family too?

    • Skylark says:

      If this is true – “It has become clear that Royal solicitors Harbottle & Lewis, which acts for Prince Charles, William and Harry, has been asked to represent Meghan, too.” – then they are most definitely if not actually engaged, then planning to be very shortly.

      And the stalled announcement, because of the Diana stuff, makes sense.

      • Merritt says:

        Or stalled due to IG, tours, and clearing up any lingering contract issues for Meghan and Suits.

      • PrincessK says:

        I also think that the Vanity Fair shoot had been in the pipeline for a while and was a nice pay day for Meghan pre any engagement announcement. There was no way it could have come out after an announcement. Harry and Meghan must be busy bees sorting out timelines, commitments and diaries, meetings with lawyers etc. not to talk of liaising with other households over the timing of things.

  23. seesittellsit says:

    $10 here I come.

  24. Island_girl says:

    The palace thinks Meghan has some skeletons in her closet: “There is every prospect that both the Prince and senior courtiers must resign themselves to a future in which unexpected and unwelcome revelations emerge from the US.”

    Ugh…leave it to the DM to get that dig in even with a seemingly positive piece.

    The palace needs to take a look in the damn mirror as far as skeletons are concerned. Generations of skeletons in ALL of their closets.

  25. perplexed says:

    With Ascot-trype hats on their heads and updos, Kate and Megan might look similar in photographs when standing next to each other.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Beyond being slim and brunette, I don’t see similarities. I know some think Pippa and Meghan M look alike, but all I see is a young Wallace Simpson whenever I see Pippa.

      • perplexed says:

        That’s why I mentioned the hats and updos.

        I don’t think they look facially similar. But once Meghan has to to start wearing the British-y royal type stuff with the hats obscuring part of the face, I can see myself confusing the two in photos. That’s why I used the word “might.”

      • PrincessK says:

        @nota…..Yes, Pippa is the spit of Wallace Simpson. If only she were an actress she could really carry that role. When Wallace smiled naturally she was really pretty and quite beguiling. Also nobody did ‘style’ like the Duke and Duchess of Windsor, whatever you say about them, only Charles comes a bit close. I really wish William and Harry would be a bit more upper class stylish.

    • CynicalAnn says:

      I think Meghan is really petite-so probably not so much.

  26. Rae says:

    I wish them both the best.

  27. Bliss 51 says:

    Wait, wait, now hold on a second, Sophie had a topless photo scandal?! How did I not know that? Isn’t she close to HM because they have a shared love of, I don’t know, something historical and musty? Poring over huge scholarly tomes? I can’t stop laughing. Anyway, I hope Meghan doesn’t wear fascinators.

    • Royalsparkle says:


      What scandal!? Henry sparkle wasnt purposely flashing on a Royal Tour without proper u derwear – using airports and usi h helicopters!! Wadnt waity for a decade and secretly wed another – this was life !

  28. Bliss 51 says:

    Wait, wait, now hold on a second, Sophie had a topless photo scandal?! How did I not know that? Isn’t she close to HM because they have a shared love of, I don’t know, something historical and musty? Poring over huge scholarly tomes? I can’t stop laughing.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Yes a pre-Edward holiday snap that was published. HM and Sophie are said to like reading about military history, and Sophie has now started investing in her own race horses which matches HM’s love of that. Lady Louise is training in carriage riding, a sport that Philip helped make into a competition sport.

      It may be that none of these things are interesting to Sophie, but she’s smart-enough to take them on to make a place as the favorite.

      • PrincessK says:

        Yes, Sophie is very smart and she has tried to ‘up’ her dressing style too so that the photographers don’t ignore her over the other royal ladies. Also Louise resembles granny a lot.

  29. Katherine says:

    I wish an acting career could’ve been a thing to give away cause I would’ve taken it off her hands now that she is giving up that, sigh, I just like acting way more than whatever this royal lifestyle has to offer

  30. Bliss 51 says:

    Would Meghan have to give up American citizenship? Minus side of a royal marriage, life in a golden cage, cutting ribbons in a factory in the hinterlands. Plus side, exploring museums, royal gardens, great libraries, fine paintings, antiques.

    • Tina says:

      No. She may ultimately become a British citizen, but there is no requirement that she relinquish her US citizenship. She can still vote, but she shouldn’t comment about politics as a member of the BRF.

      • BritAfrica says:

        She can still vote??

        Wow….did not know that! I thought voting was a no-no the minute you join the firm.

      • Tina says:

        Well, they can all vote if they want to, but I understand that most of them choose not to exercise that right.

    • bluhare says:

      I would be very surprised if she did not take out British citizenship. Very.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I could see her going for dual citizenship, but earning it through time and official procedure – not getting to jump the queue.

      • suze says:

        I’ll bet anyone on here $100 AMERICAN lol that she becomes a British citizen, probably becoming more Brit than the Brits. At least in some ways.

        On a practical level, it’s very murky how the US treats its dual citizens. It’s allowed, sort of. Sometimes. There is the whole taxation issue, which could become particularly tricky for her.

        The Danish marry-ins from other countries all serve in the Home Guard, proving their loyalty to their adopted country. I am not sure Meghan will go that far, but I think she’ll definitely become a citizen.

    • whatever says:

      I think she may have to. Marrying a British Prince and working for the British royal family requires a person to champion British causes, products, institutions and culture above that of any other country. Some could view that as pledging her allegiance to another country which seems like a no-no in America.

      There is also the pesky task of singing/miming God Save the Queen in public, (not sure how well that will go down in America lol) and publicly supporting the British Military (which all senior Royals do). She may be forced to give it up from pressure from both sides of the pond.

    • PrincessK says:

      If she keeps US citizenship wouldn’t she still be liable to pay US taxes?

      • Tina says:

        Yes. But she may well have enough money to be subject to the exit tax, and also there’s a clause in the Immigration and Nationality Act that says that if you renounce your US citizenship in order to avoid tax, you are barred from the US. It’s my understanding that no one has actually been barred under this provision, but immigration lawyers will usually advise an affidavit at the time of renunciation giving all the non-tax reasons why the person is renouncing. Bearcat Lawyer would probably know more about it.

      • notasugarhere says:

        In 2011 the duty-free Millers renounced (including not-really-crown-princess of Greece). Pavlos and Marie-Chantal are often in NYC and may have moved back this year. So they at least weren’t banned.

  31. themummy says:

    This is apropos of nothing, but I find it really annoying when articles refer to her as “Meg.” She goes by Meghan, not Meg. It’s an odd over-familiarity and it’s kind of annoying to read. If I were famous and went by my full name, Jennifer, it would be annoying as fk if tabloids just called me “Jen,” as if we were buddies or something. For all we know, literally no one in her life calls her Meg. It’s been annoying me for AGES (I know, silly), but I feel better now having typed it. Her name is Meghan, not Meg. Meghan.

    • suze says:

      I understand finding it annoying, but I would say you will have to come to some kind of terms with it. “Catherine” has not stuck for Kate, not at all, and Diana was Di until the end of her life. Fergie probably wishes Sarah was the media’s name of choice for her.

    • Marr says:

      It’s condescending as f*ck, I agree.

    • whatever says:

      eh.. she has said in past interview that she likes the nickname Meg and doesn’t mind being called that. Condescending and annoying its not if Meghan doesn’t see it that way.

  32. BeamMeUpScottie says:

    On another note…. Big George (to use Lainey’s term) is under pressure already to pick up the slack left by his dad and Funcle Harry….

  33. seesittellsit says:

    Well, I’m fairly certain of my $10 at this point. If you look at HELLO, for example, the level of saturation and now nearly daily articles on her/them/the announcement/how it could happen/when it could happen – I kinda feel that regardless of what actually has or has not happened behind the scenes, I don’t think Harry has a choice any longer. Even if he wanted to back out or he wasn’t sure yet or hadn’t proposed yet, the media breathlessness, expectation, and pressure would make getting divorced in five years easier than breaking up now. I’m not saying that’s the case, I’m only saying that when press level reaches this pitch, it exerts a pressure of its own on events. And it would also be my guess that MM is shrewd enough to know that.

  34. Evie says:

    I wish Meghan and Harry all the best.

    Honestly, I think her being bi-racial is probably not a big deal to the royals. The other boxes she ticks off are things the Royals find more objectionable: 1. American; 2. Catholic; 3. Actress or soon to be former actress. It is still a law in England that the heir to the throne cannot marry a Catholic. Talk about institutional discrimination after centuries of killing Catholics in Ireland!!!!
    Meghan being a divorcee is not the hot issue. The House of Windsor has had so many divorces that they can hardly carp about that.
    I just hope the BRF doesn’t suck the life out of her. I think living with the constraints of royal life will be very challenging. And I don’t think anything can prepare her for it until she’s actually doing it. As for the citizenship, I believe she can become a British citizen and still retain her American citizenship — dual nationality.

    Once Kate and Will’s third child is born, Harry will be 6th in line to the throne. And in another 10 years, the interest in Harry & Meg will diminish just like it has with Prince Andrew as he’s gotten older. The press will focus on George, Charlotte and their upcoming sibling. And Harry & Meghan will be looked on much like Beatrice, Eugenie et al. are today.

    One thing you can absolutely be sure of is that the BRF will NOT allow another Diana situation. And to be honest, I don’t think that’s the case with Meghan. It will be a long time before we see another person — royal or not — emerge with Diana’s level of charisma.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Lord Freddie Windsor is married to tv actress Sophie Winkleman, from 2 1/2 men. He’s still in the succession, no riots over her lingerie scenes, no being barred from royal events.

      Royals in the BRF have married Canadians, Maoris, and German/Austro-Hungarian Baronesses. Being American is not going to be a big issue.

      We don’t know what religion Markle is. Anyone can go to a Catholic high school; you don’t have to be Catholic to attend one. Heirs to the throne can marry Catholics as of 2013 and remain in the succession. They just cannot convert themselves and stay in line.

      Harry will be the son of the reigning monarch and one of only 6 working royals. He and whomever he marries will be working royals for at least 20 years. If media interest switches to W&K’s children (who will all be raised like Howard Hughes IMO), they still won’t become working royals until they are 25-30.

      Harry’s kids will likely not be working royals. As long as he and spouse raise them quietly and prepare them for private life, hopefully they’ll be able to live out of the spotlight like Lady Sarah Chatto, etc.

      • Evie says:

        @notasugarhere: I did not say nor mean to imply that Meghan’s acting career would bump Harry out of the line of succession, just that the BRF wouldn’t necessarily be pleased about it. Queen Elizabeth lived through the abdication of her Uncle when he choose to abidicate the throne for an American divorcee Wallis Simpson. That shook her family to the core and just about killed her shy, stuttering father “Bertie.” So based on that I do think that Harry marrying an American is a bigger deal than marrying a European etc., IMO.

        True, non-Catholics can attend a Catholic school. MM’s religion has been listed as Catholic, while her father is Jewish. I’m just stating my opinion on what I think might make the BRF anxious about Meghan. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out. One thing they won’t abide though is another Diana who’s more popular than all of them and going rogue. Not saying Meghan would do that, just that I think that’s their biggest fear.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I don’t think being American was the problem with Wallace Simpson. It was their joint politics, in addition to her being twice-divorced in that era. She could have been any citizenship and the same thing would have happened IMO.

        I don’t see the acting as a problem. HM is said to like people who work hard, and she’s smart-enough to recognize television acting is a job. She might even enjoy having someone in the family who knows how to give a speech right out of the gate, which would be a big plus. The BRF needs employees who know how to work, can step into the job straightaway, and have a work ethic. That is part of why Sophie is so good at it and appreciated by them – because she knows it is a PR job and that’s what she’s good at.

      • PrincessK says:

        So when George and his siblings become working royals when William is on the throne, how many working royals will there be? I would like to see Harry’s children be Princes and Princesses and eventually Dukes , Duchesses, Earls and Countesses. I don’t want them to fade into obscurity.

      • notasugarhere says:

        It is unlikely Harry’s kids would be working royals. If Charles’s rumored plan is true, when he is monarch there will be 6 – Charles, Camilla, W, K, H, and Harry’s spouse. Harry and spouse will be working royals, and W&K’s kids will likely take up duties when they are early thirties. Sticking with the downsizing plan, that would be plenty of working royals without Harry’s kids.

    • PrincessK says:

      In another ten years the interest in Harry and Meghan will certainly NOT diminish, it will be even more interesting. Hopefully they will have a young family and Charles will be on the throne.

  35. Bliss 51 says:

    Run Meghan run!

  36. Becks says:

    I’m kind of LOLing that her Vanity Fair cover was the beginning of “reducing her publicity.”

  37. fran says:

    markle is controversial (family roots, american actress), feisty (sugar sweet till she marries him-think miranda k till jho low). he thinks perfect pick to shake royal stodgy image (rebel diana champion) do u think she will tow the line?