VF: The Queen has taken Sussexit ‘personally’ & she ‘doesn’t want to talk about it’

Queen's Christmas broadcast

Katie Nicholl at Vanity Fair has finally done her take on last Friday’s Formal Sussexit Plan, or whatever we’re calling it now. I read the Friday announcement as a statement of facts, a series of fact-checks and clarifications in the wake of a lot of smears and misinformation, with a tone of annoyance from the Sussexes at having to deal with all of the bulls–t from the palace, the Queen and courtiers. Nicholl says the annoyance goes both ways, and Liz of House Petty just wants this whole mess to be over. You can read the full Nicholl piece here. Some highlights:

The courtiers were mad that Sussexit was announced in the first place: The Queen has made it clear that a “half in half out” approach will not work, and behind palace walls there has been much frustration over the Sussexes jumping the gun before a proper plan was in place. For the Queen, it has been a case of balancing private feelings with public responsibility, and sources say she has shown decisive leadership and loyalty to the only brand that matters to her—the House of Windsor.

No one wants to say that the Queen is petty AF: “By ruling against their use of the Sussex Royal brand, she drew the line on exploiting their royal connection for profit,” said royal biographer Sally Bedell Smith. “I think in the process she has showed the sort of flexibility and adherence to standards that strengthen the monarchy.”

The Queen has taken everything “personally”: While the Queen has been publicly supportive of Harry and Meghan’s decision to step down as senior royals, sources close to her say she has taken it personally. “She generally doesn’t want to talk about it,” says one source. “The Queen has been keen to get this resolved because she sees it is damaging to the monarchy and on a personal level I think this has been rather hurtful for her. She has got to the point where she doesn’t want to think about it anymore, she just wants it over and done with.”

The Queen yanked the Sussexes ‘royal’ branding to protect the monarch? “The Queen’s disciplinary power within her family is seldom mentioned and seldom used. The mere threat of her displeasure is enough to keep the troops in line most of the time,” said former courtier Patrick Jephson. ‘When something more emphatic is required in defense of the dynasty, she does what’s necessary. People are reassured when she acts to protect the monarchy. It’s an institution that occasionally has to demonstrate robust self-belief to remain credible as a focus of national unity. Perhaps it’s her longevity but the Queen has a gift for keeping problems in perspective. Her instincts are humane, cautious and pragmatic.”

No one wants to admit that the Queen makes terrible decisions: The Queen is “fully engaged in her role,” according to Sally Bedell Smith. “For all the travails of last year and the early months of 2020, she continues to maintain her enviable serenity and carries out her duties in her unflappable fashion,” Smith said. “Of course these family crises have been challenging, vexing, and sad. But in removing Andrew from his public duties and negotiating the tricky departure of Harry and Meghan from royal life, the Queen was decisive and sure-footed.”

Prince Harry was prepared to walk away with nothing: Sources close to Harry say while he is disappointed to have to completely give up royal duties, particularly his role with the military, his independence and his family’s happiness is more important than his royal status. “He went into this knowing that he could lose his title, but his freedom is more important than any of that,” said a friend. “He and Meghan have a back-up plan in place.”

[From Vanity Fair]

This kind of “let’s make Sussexit all about how the Queen feels” makes me wonder… about a lot, actually. It’s clear that the Queen’s gotten a ton of “bad news” over the past three months – Sussexit, Prince Andrew’s terrible interview, the Earl of Snowden’s marriage falling apart, and Peter Phillips’ marriage falling apart. But out of all of those moments, it was the Andrew thing that really exposed the Queen and her f–ked up priorities.

As much as all of these royal commentators want to make a fuss about how decisive and level-headed she is, the Queen didn’t do a g–damn thing to Andrew until Charles put his foot down. And after that, the Queen was still making appearances with Andrew and doing the most to bring him back into the royal fold. And THAT shows what she’s really like. THAT shows her priorities and her state of mind. The Sussexit underlined that point – what the Queen will do to protect her “favorite” son from the repercussions of his criminal behavior, versus what she will not do to protect a granddaughter-in-law from vile, racist abuse. Instead, the Queen took Sussexit personally and reacted with pettiness. The Queen and everyone around her have completely lost the plot.

(L-R) Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, Prime Minister, Boris Johnson and Carrie Symonds attend the annual Royal British Legion Festival of Remembrance at the Royal Albert Hall on November 09, 2019 in London, England.

Photos courtesy of WENN, Backgrid and Avalon Red.

Related stories

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

290 Responses to “VF: The Queen has taken Sussexit ‘personally’ & she ‘doesn’t want to talk about it’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Erinn says:

    Yo Sally, how’s the old biddy feeling about Andrew? I assume you’ve questioned everyone to great depths about that story, right?

    • Me says:

      Exactly, here is this son who has been a total moral train wreck with a slap on the wrist for a bad interview ( not his questionable behavior and friends) yet the spotlight is on The Sussex’s who have not been accused of a crime ( Andrew) or any shady behavior. I am appalled. To our Friend here in England is there a reason their is not a total uproar in your country about Andrew and the way the RF has supported him?

      • Tessa says:

        Andrew had the nerve to trash the woman who is accusing him. Never mind criticizing Epstein!

      • Lua says:

        I just…. don’t know why anyone is surprised? She’s his mother. He’s apparently her favorite? Of course she’s protecting him. Was she close to Harry? Her opinion is he betrayed her. She’s wrong. But no one should be surprised. Mothers do stupid things to protect their children. Lots of people in prison still have mothers who support them. Affluent families try to protect their terrible children.

      • Nic919 says:

        Most mothers aren’t the head of state so her actions in covering for her son are a violation of her oath as monarch to defend the laws of the UK. Those laws include cooperating with a police investigation about underage rape.

        Besides she’s chosen duty over family so many other times it’s pretty obvious what she’s doing now.

      • Tash says:

        @Nic919 – 👏👏👏

      • Lucy De Blois says:

        Tessa: Andy is going to trash anything or anyone who threats his comforts. His wife certainly must have something very well hidden and solid to keep her advantages.

        Lua: Mothers really do stupid things to protect her kids; but, like she said many, ohhh so many times, she’s the Queen and mother (in this exactly order). So: either she lied or the order is not that one?? What are you going to expect from the chief of a nation who covers the crimes of someone, just because he (she) is her son (daughter)?? What example she’s going to give to the judges? The policemen? The Chiefs of the Police Stations??

    • Nic919 says:

      All the Sussex stuff is trivial compared to Andrew. Worried about the royal brand? What about Andrew. Not tarnishing the house of Windsor? What about Andrew. No sketchy money schemes while being a royal? What about Andrew. Being decisive? What about Andrew.

      Andrew is the albatross that will define the twilight years of her reign and she’s not going to look very good as a result. The Diana mess was bad enough, but this is harbouring a criminal and everyone knows it. The people who don’t pay attention to the royals are aware of Andrew and believe he did it. His own interview helped seal the deal in his lack of credibility.

      • Some chick says:

        Yep. All of this, all day.

        But, hey! Look! A squirrel!!!

      • LahdidahBaby says:

        Nic919, you got it. Exactly. Best summary I’ve seen of this.

      • Erinn says:

        “The people who don’t pay attention to the royals are aware of Andrew and believe he did it. ”

        And that’s a huge deal. People who don’t give the royals the time of day are still aware that he is a predator.

      • Christina says:

        QE is a product of the racist, sexist time and family that bore her. Long live Meg and Harry.

      • khaveman says:

        Harry and Meghan are distractions to a MUCH more vile issue that it seems the RF wants to sweep under the rug. Or lessen.

      • DragonWise says:

        What Christina said! I think Queenie is still of the mindset that noble men have dalliances of all kinds, and it’s to be expected, and kept under the rug. I don’t think she has any empathy for the young girls that he abused, and hopes that with enough time and diversion with the Sussexes, it will all go away and she can go back to ignoring that her son and all his ilk are exploitative, ephebophillic trash.

      • Amy Lynn says:

        Nic919, I totally agree with LahdidahBaby. You summarized this fu%ked up situation in just a few short sentences. Short, sweet and to the point. Honestly, it’s the best comment I’ve read about this mess so far…and I have read a lot!!!!

    • Abena Asantewaa says:

      It looks like the number of people ready to join the bandwagon of smear keeps growng, I see Elizabeth Holmes; (SMTh) is busy these days kissing up to the royal reporters, especially; Russell Myers editor of The Mirror. Elizabeth Holmes post negative comments all the time about the Sussexes, while’s praising W&K, especially Kate, and then leaves her followers to tear into The Sussexes. She dogwhistles a lot, she is now chummy with the royal rota set.. I unfollowed her since.

      • TeamAwesome says:

        I’ve noticed that as well, and it is really unfortunate.

      • GuestOne says:

        E Holmes has a book to promote. She probably wants to get on royal podcasts etc. IMHO she also has been one of those passive aggressive types from the beginning& thought the way she over analysed Meghan was uncomfortable…

      • ans says:

        OMG, I’ve noticed this too and have come THIS close to unfollowing her over it. But I still enjoy the fashion aspects of her IG. But it’s always been clear that she favors Kate over Meghan, for all her “both sides” BS. There just isn’t a “both sides” in every situation.

    • Ronaldinhio says:

      Came to say the queen’S make up is all wrong here

    • PrincessK says:

      I think people are overestimating the power of the Queen. She relies on her advisers who are anti Sussex, and also on what Charles and William want. She doesn’t want to upset those two because they are in the line of succession and she doesn’t want to be the monarch that makes it all go belly up.

  2. Alexandria says:

    And here’s my big FU to this petty, cold, unintelligent, racist woman who thinks she knows it all.

  3. Flying fish says:

    Elizabeth disgusts me.

    • Ali says:

      She truly is an idiot

      • HK9 says:

        …and the courtiers, inept “PR” people, and oh yeah, the rest of that family.

      • Lucy De Blois says:

        HK9: You all are absolutely right if you call them ignorant, racists, destituted of the minimum of caracter to perform high public duties, and on and on…. But inept, no. Not that much… Lol.

        They are like a train on rails… They just go. If the attack is successful or not, never mind, they keep shooting. Right, left and center. Of course, some tactics of marketing to smash the Sussex are so old they date from the beggining of the publicity on last century. But they go on, never stopping, relentless…. I even suspect they have a team with several hundreds of emails to do the job. Specially on Express and DM.

        The Sussex are doomed. For me, it’s clear as water the battle is far from the end and the RF won’t stop. Until they are flat on the ground. Like the articles here said so often, if there’s not a pre-existent rule against what they want, be sure it’s going to be invented to bring H&M as many obstacles as possible.
        And, like I said so many times, that period of 12 months for H&M to “settle down on their new life” sounded ominous since the beggining (at least for me).
        If you want to make an agreement with someone, you do, and it’s done. Putting a clause to reviewing the bases of it, means trouble: for one, or the other. Please, take the word of someone who’s in business for more than thirty years.

        British Monarchy has survived for… what? More than thousand years? I’m not talking about the House of Windsor. I’m talking about monarchy. And it’s the monarchy against H&M, not only the Windors. Poor kittens. God help them and I wish them all my best because I know what life is and they are so… young! I hope they have a good net of support and good advisors. They are going to need it,

      • windyriver says:

        @Lucy, I believe they’ll be fine. Britannia no longer rules the waves; nor does the British tabloid media have the influence elsewhere they apparently do in the UK, Page 6 and Fox News notwithstanding.

        Look at the past month. Despite continuing harassment by the BM (and RF) (mindlessly regurgitated by other outlets): 1) an influential US bank asked Harry to give an address to its highest profile clients; 2) the president of one of the world’s best universities personally greeted Harry and Meghan when they came to campus; and 3) Jon Bon Jovi showed he’s an FOH (friend of Harry). This tells me intelligent people respect H&M for what they’ve already accomplished. In time, they’ll be more and more known for their work, and whatever the BM or RF throw out there will look more and more silly.

        Plus, it sounds like as of April 1, H&M are no longer bound by the RF regarding what they can say, and when. Won’t be required to interface with the Rota. So, they can respond to rumors – like what really happened over their “fired” office staff – quickly, if they want to.

        We don’t know what the 12-month review is about. One theory is, Charles hopes to work out a way H&M can do part-time royal work, as they asked. Could be about continuing financing; but if H&M are self-sufficient by then, the review may be irrelevant. The only absolutely critical item for them is security, but it sounds like that’s the purview of the government, not under the juridiction/at the pleasure of the RF.

        One last related item of interest – as per the Guardian, since Caroline Flack’s death hair salons around the UK are boycotting ‘toxic’ gossip magazines. One owner said “I think this has really hit home to a lot of people that what we’re reading isn’t good for our mental health”. Hope this is a trend.


      • Lucy De Blois says:

        Windyriver: Bless your words. MM had a plate full last year with the tabloids, plus dear daddy, plus dear Sis and all the royal houses, she needs a break. I really wish them the best because the way they look each other shows real love flowing, and true love is something to be preserved at all costs, no matter what. And would hate to see the little baby growing amid that insane battle.

    • EM says:

      Her *support* for Brexit really reinforced her priorities and racism. She really expected Harry and Meghan to take the abuse all while smiling. Liz just doesn’t want anyone leaving her and her ego will have her going after H&M for as long as possible. It’s a miracle Diana got out.

      • LahdidahBaby says:

        But truly, did Diana get out? No sooner was she out and living her own life, then she was chased down and killed in a tunnel in Paris, where it *couldn’t* be connected to TQ and the BRF. I know it may sound extreme, but Diana was supposedly about to marry Fayed–a person of color (appalling and unthinkable in the eyes of the staid BRF and esp TQ) and she needed to *go away* before that came to be. All these years later, Harry marries a woman of color and look what has happened.

      • Lucy De Blois says:

        More right than you are is impossible. Just one little detail.

        Diana wasn’t only “supposedly about to marry a person of color”. Months before her death (or one year, I don’t remember exactly), she had imploded the business of minefields, with a huge world wide campaign for awereness of this cruel, vicious weapon which makes so many victims, even after the war is over.
        I know there were agreements to be signed by many countries to ban such desgrace.
        But the commerce of war weapons not only involves billions in profits, it involves government linked companies, and you imagine what more. Many unhappy people she made.

        if she continued her fight for a “better world” with her charm, her beauty and her lack of worry about earning the life, only God knows where she would stop.
        So, I believe someone could have thought better to be safe than to be sorry,

      • PrincessK says:

        I don’t think she supported Brexit, which threatens the Union. It increases the. ChNces of Scotland and Northern Ireland breaking away.

    • rawiya says:

      I can’t stand her nowadays.

  4. Izzy says:

    “there has been much frustration over the Sussexes jumping the gun before a proper plan was in place”

    And whose fault is that? Harry literally didn’t even want to WRITE IT DOWN because he knew it would leak. For someone who “doesn’t want to talk about it,” Liz of House Petty and her Merry Band of Inbred Racists sure can’t STFU and stop leaking to the so-called reporters who make a living smearing the Sussexes on behalf of House Petty.

    • Guest with Cat says:

      So true. How many brands of obtuse are these people?! The mind boggles.

    • Tessa says:

      The Queen also staged that pathetic patriarchal photo op with the two men and the child succeeding her. Awful.

      • Lucy De Blois says:

        Of course. That story of the queen having taking it personally just now is too big for anyone’s throat.

        The article, very wisely, exposes the picture of her speech on Dec/2019; she had already erased the Sussexes from the RF. And even worse, on the very same year her great-grandson Archie was born. Not even a picture of him.

        Just the direct heirs?? BS. Sorry the language.

    • (TheOG) jan90067 says:

      Jumping the gun? When she and Tampon Charlie played games, refusing to meet with Harry so as to get things decided in a timely way?

      Yeah…she can suck rocks. Literally has ice in her veins. It wouldn’t surprise me to find she actually said that line, from The Crown, that she’s “missing that emotion chip”.

    • Belli says:

      Exactly. It was leaked in the morning and by the time the announcement came in the evening there was already a frenzy. Less than 24 hours. Imagine if there had been silence for weeks If it hadn’t leaked, the Sussexes wouldn’t have announced.

      So the question is, who leaked to Dan Wooton at the Sun and started everything?

      I wonder if that same person also planted the story that the Queen had been blindsided. Maybe that person hadn’t been involved with the talks themselves and assumed it was therefore completely new to everyone. We know that the Queen and Charles knew and we’re stalling discussions, but maybe someone else was incandescent with rage at having been left out.

      • GuestWho says:

        Dan Wootton is very good friends with KPs communications guy. There is very little question of who leaked it to him. This is all Willy throwing a very public tantrum.

      • Becks1 says:

        I think @Belli is implying that – that William leaked it and that because he had been out of the loop on the discussions until he got whatever was written down, he was furious and started the whole “the queen was blindsided” narrative.

      • GuestOne says:

        Reminder of the Shipman report of April 2019 that William was meeting newspaper heads to prepare for being king and Harry was upset by decisions of those same newspapers to side with the palace over the Sussexes and peddle most negative coverage of Meghan’s relationship with Thomas Snr. Piece also suggested that the palace wanted the Sussexes exiled to somewhere in Africa to calm down popularity as feared prospect of impact of popularity if they moved to Canada or Australia. Also said the palace was working with government officials to harness their star power for benefit of the monarchy. Various royal reporters then did follow up stories and with Roya saying government officials were looking at global ambassadors role for the Sussexes involving their QCT roles (naming a cabinet minister and the Queen’s former aide who now also works for QCT). Dan Wooten also piped up with a piece about six months long breaks from the UK in Africa, Fail and ITV reporters suggested they would be doing secondments away but 2-3 months at a time.

        I’m so curious how these reports played into what eventually transpired with Sussexit. But also very bizarre that I haven’t seen these pieces referred to at all since Sussexit was announced especially with how it was initially reported how people in the palace were blindsided by the news (we know that was a lie), people have been shocked even though by time Sussexit was announced these articles had been out there for 9 months.

        I know someone mentioned that Tina Brown is doing a book but I find it hard to believe we are really gonna get to the heart of all this and risk upsetting future monarchs…

    • 😂…… Sally Bedell Smith. “I think in the process she has showed the sort of flexibility and adherence to standards that strengthen the monarchy.” 😂

      I so agree Izzy — and what the Queen has shown is no flexibility and no adherence to standards. I believe she and Charles and William along with the other minor House Petty family minstrels have significantly weakened the monarchy…..although it will keep thumping along as always. House Petty actions and inactions show that there are different rules and different standards being inforced. If she is so in control, why doesn’t she lift a finger to shut down the the hateful and continuous dribbling of her family, her courtiers, and the rabid press? By House Petty actions she shows it is all about protecting and continuing to protect institutionalized inbred elitism, classism, and racism. Hail Britannia as House Petty pisses all over itself. Or, to quote Prince Harry — taken from bio I just read): ‘If I have one foot in yesterday and the other in tomorrow, I’m in the perfect position to piss all over today.’

    • Le4Frimaire says:

      That’s what I don’t get. She doesn’t want to talk about it but her, and the rest of the “ senior “ royals can’t shut up for one second, their courtiers won’t stop leaking, the royal rota wont stop talking. Yet they all freak out and pull out their hair over one statement by the Sussexes. Seriously the royals are really dragging the arse out of this and just stop talking, for real.

      • Lucy De Blois says:

        Does that reminds you something? Rings a bell about someone doing exactly the same? Toxic Thomas comes to mind?

        For sure the tabloids were using Toxic Thomas as a plataform of negative publicity for H&M, since DM and Express are part of the ROTA the rest is easy to guess; i said many times, their marketing estrategies are so old you can see cobwebs.

    • Tina says:

      My opinion is not going to go over well here, but I think it is quite possible that the Sussexes could have gotten what they wanted if they had negotiated more behind the scenes rather than release their website at the beginning of the year. I know there were leaks but they could still have all denied until everything was ready. It sounds like they wanted Harry to continue most of his royal work and Megan could be free to do more of our own projects without royal oversight and also spend more time in North America. All of which I could have seen them negotiating first, especially since Harry is a favorite of Elizabeth and they had some dirt on potentially WIlliam as leverage. The website release forced the royals have the Sandringham Summit and make decisions that probably H&M did not want. Look at their staff and office in Buckingham palace. They said on their website more recently that “it was decided in January that the Institutional Office would be closed” and that they shared this news “once they knew of the decision”. It’s their Office and their staff. They chose to walk away as Royals and at the Summit agreed to the decision and when they word it this way they are not taking responsibility that their decision would force the closure of this office.

      • Becks1 says:

        So, I can kind of see your point, but that leak (presumably from William) to Dan Wootton was REALLY damaging. If he knew that much, what else did he know? What else would he spill? There was little chance of negotiating behind the scenes at that point in time. That leak did a lot of damage to the whole process.

        I do think you may be right that they may have gotten more had it been more private, but that just further cements in my mind that it was William – he wanted to damage the process and it worked.

      • GuestOne says:

        That point could definitely work with idea from those articles in April 2019 that the palace& government officials were looking at roving ambassador roles for the Sussexes earlier last year.

        But if they were prepared to work with Harry why were Charles& the Queen’s courtiers allegedly stonewalling him about discussing possible plans?

        If it was a case they got less than they wanted because they went public too early then suggests initial quotes from courtiers that they would be punished was correct. Royal reporters and commentators have been insisting they had to withdraw from royal duties despite still wanting to do them& also do paid work because you can’t be half in and half out& that being abroad plus wanting endorsements, sponsorships etc is more risky.

        The BP office closed because the Queen decided they couldn’t do royal duties on her behalf anymore& therefore their staff wouldn’t be paid through the sovereign grant anymore.

        Apparently some may stay on helping with new charitable org& travalyst.

      • MsIam says:

        In order for H&M to negotiate they would have had to have had meetings with TQ or Charles or their reps. Harry was being blocked in every way. They wouldn’t take him seriously. I think they went public because of the leak and because of the stonewalling by TQ and Charles. I think Harry was fed up and ready to go. Being away 6 weeks cleared his head. And I think that while he would have wanted to keep working for his military patronages, the rest that was offered was just as a courtesy to TQ. I don’t think he and Meg are brokenhearted about losing the commonwealth ambassador roles if it meant they could be free.

  5. Digital Unicorn says:

    Hmm, Katie Nicholl’s and VF – wonder who has been leaking to these 2. Nicholls is a Katie Keen hagiographer and the editor of VF is an old uni chum of our future futre Kween Consort.

    Hi Carole and William, we see you!!

    Now that Harry is not in the picture William is now throwing Granny under the bus. Now I really really want to know what the press have on him.

    There is clearly some major behind the scene’s drama going on over Sussexit with everyone involved. Throw in Andrew trying to use it to worm his way back in – you’ve got a PR nightmare that NO ONE is even attempting to deal with. TQ is doing her very best ostrich impression, the same one she did with Diana’s death – look how that worked out for her.

    • Mac says:

      Nah, this is BP trying to emotionally black mail Harry into coming back into the fold.

    • And yet, Digital Unicorn, didn’t someone mention yesterday that the Cambridge’s will be touring Ireland while Sussexes are in London? If true, his inability to even be in the same space as Harry shows what a gutless, sneaky bastard he really is —- he can dish it out but he can’t take even the slightest heat from Harry.

      • notasugarhere says:

        William is skipping the Commonwealth service to be in Ireland? At least he isn’t skipping it for vacation as he has done in the past.

      • Nic919 says:

        They are in Ireland from the 3rd to the 5th. I do find it interesting that this tour was announced as early as it was since in the past the visits to Ireland and Northern Ireland have tended to be embargoed until the day of.

      • Tessa says:

        I think William will sneak in a vacation and will be protected by the press. He can’t go for very long without a vacation.

    • BeanieBean says:

      I think it’s Tatler whose uni chum is Katie Keen, not VF.

    • Candikat says:

      @ Digital Unicorn: What? The current editor of VF went to Harvard and is 9-10 years older than Kate. They’re certainly not “old Uni chums.”

  6. Bryn says:

    Monarchy’s are dumb and it shouldn’t be a thing in the 21st century.

    • BlahBlah says:

      I agree completely, and I was just about to comment the same thing. The monarchy has no purpose in 2020 and needs to go.

      The BRF may have tons of personal wealth, but they seem like a toxic, trashy family.

    • Bettyrose says:

      No lies detected but even still it was all handled so badly. Imagine the PR benefit H & M could have been in post Brexit Britain showing a warmer more inclusive side to the RF. Or screw the RF, just that at the start of this new chapter in Britain’s history.

      • Digital Unicorn says:

        Am British and with the way things are going for us at the moment we have the Royal Family we deserve. They in their current from represent that ‘Little Englander’ attitude that caused Brexit. The Cambridges are the poster couple for this attitude, given that its long been reported that William has VERY conservative political views and Katie Kween is just nothing more than stepford arm candy. Chuck is a bit more open minded which shows in the work that he does to promote the environment, sustainability, empowering young people (via the Princes Trust) and the work he does to promote religious tolerance. He will be a good King, his eldest son however…..

      • Feeshalori says:

        @DU, what is this Little Englander attitude? I’ve seen it mentioned a couple of times here and I’m not sure what that means. From context, it sounds like an old school ultra conservative way of thinking versus a more progressive and modern approach. But I’d like to be sure.

      • Digital Unicorn says:

        @Feeshalori – its used to describe people who yearn for the good ole days of the British Empire when were were a global power and still think we are. They still have that colonial attitude.

        The US equivalent would be MAGATs.

      • Bohemian Angel says:

        Little Englander basically means someone who wants to go back to life in the 30s-50s, where there were no or not many black and brown people, everyone spoke the queens English, men and women knew their places, they has an empire they could be proud of so they could feel the country had great importance. They are people that are inward looking and not progressive at all.

      • Feeshalori says:

        Ok, thank you both @DU and BA for the explanation. You’ve explained it very clearly to this Yank!

    • notasugarhere says:

      The weird thing is, 6 out of 10 self-described Happiest Countries are monarchies. Is it because life is so good in those countries, they put up with still having this strange government structure?

      • Nic919 says:

        Canada is usually included and while it’s technically a constitutional monarchy, the Queen has little involvement in the daily life of Canadians. She’s on the money and in some portraits in government buildings, but otherwise she’s an ocean away. The moronic Doug Ford govt thought it would be a good idea to bring back god save the Queen as an anthem to be sung at queens park once a month and many are saying it’s antiquated and particularly offensive with the blockades going on about the pipeline. The canadian anthem has been the standard for several generations. You need to reach back to boomers who actually recall it as the de facto canadian national anthem.

        The Queen works best in Canada when you don’t have to think about her.

      • Anners says:

        Seconding what Nic919 says. Rarely think of royalty unless I’m reading Celebitchy or staring at my money. It’s just not really a thing over here for most of us (and my Dad is British).

        It’s funny, watching the first two seasons of The Crown gave me a great deal of sympathy for the young QEII, which she has squandered in the past few months of pedophile protecting and complete disregard for the emotional and psychological abuse her new granddaughter in law was receiving. The whole institution needs to be taken down.

  7. S808 says:

    I don’t think she cares. All she wants is her dear Andy to stay out of jail. The rest is noise and she can’t be bothered. The Summit is over so I bet as far as she is concerned her involvement is too and PC can handle everything else with his children. Cause THAT’S worked out SO well before *sarcasm*

    • HoyaLawya says:

      I honestly think she really doesn’t care about any of her grandchildren as much as people think.

      • Nyro says:

        @HoyaLawya, all she seems to care about are her horses, her dogs, and her Andrew. That’s it. If she truly cared about Harry she would not have allowed this media assault on his family to continue.

      • Elisa says:

        I 100% agree with you @HoyaLawya. It so so obvious she doesn’t care about them at all and I’m glad she is finally getting called out for it.
        And I also agree with @s808: IMO Charles is pulling the strings in the background now and he only cares about making Charles look good.
        So same same, but different.

  8. Em says:

    Oh, I think the queen is giddy about this – it’s totally distracting from pedo Andy AND it gives her an excuse to put him back to work as a royal sooner!

    She is petty AF and I d wonder how much Charles agrees with that she’s doing.

    Bet dollars to donuts that she will push for Andrew to come back as soon as this spring.

    • (TheOG) jan90067 says:

      Just in time for Bea’s wedding, in full, military regalia and honors, waving from the chaffered car 🤮

  9. Eleonor says:

    Breaking news your Majesty: your son is a child rapist.

  10. Rae says:

    This past year especially has been very illuminating on what the Queen’s priorities are when she arbitrarily draws the line.

    This is a fluff piece: which says to me that they know they’ve taken a PR hit, because they don’t usually need to roll this shit out about TQ.

    Very interesting.

  11. aquarius64 says:

    This wouldn’t be an issue and public hemorrhaging if the queen didn’t cape for Andrew and let the Sussexes be savaged by the British press (and that his Rose bush trimming heir may be behind it). You would think lessons were learned from Diana but obviously not. I think courtiers reported back to her that she is branded as Petty Betty and pedo enabler on social media; the royal reporter minions’ influence only goes so far. It’s been reported that the military does not want Andrew showing up at this year’s Trooping. Funny no one is saying ban Harry. If the queen is upset it’s dawning on her that Annus Horribils 2.0 is on her.

    • (TheOG) jan90067 says:

      Wouldn’t surprise me that Queen Betty Petty does a big FU and has Ephebophile Andy out there, front and center, in full uniform. On the other hand, if the roar becomes TOO loud (like it did with Diana), she will STILL have him out there, but towards the back, in a regular suit. But he WILL be there with Mummy. She’s his human shield, and he will use her for all he’s worth.

      *an Ephebophile is someone attracted to young adults, usually 15 to 19 who are completely, or almost completely sexually developed. I looked it up, as we use Pedo for him, and I knew it wasn’t the right term. Let’s call him out for what he really is!

      • Bettyrose says:

        I knew there was a different term but pedophile is such a strong, ugly word that better captures the power dynamic involved in sex trafficking absolutely powerless girls.

      • kacy says:

        No one knows that term. Sticking with Pedo…

      • carmen says:

        Yes, Bettyrose, I think the word “pedophile” has such an impact it just seems to be appropriate when speaking of Andy and his vile behaviour.

      • Giddy says:

        I think that both Andrew and TQ actually think of those girls as being sub-humans who should be HONORED to be raped by a royal prince.

      • Candikat says:

        But OG Jan is correct. Andy is NOT a pedophile, because to our knowledge he doesn’t prey upon or have sex with young children. Calling him “Pedo Andy” or whatever dilutes your argument and could be used by his supporters to dismiss everything you say as hysterical or ignorant. If you don’t want to use “ephebophile” (which, yes, isn’t likely to catch on) then “Rapist Andy” will suffice and has the advantage of (allegedly) being accurate.

      • Bettyrose says:

        Rape is also a pretty ugly word, and I’m fine calling him a rapist, but given the added horror involved of victims in a developmental stage of life being held against their will it’s stretch to say we’re being hysterical or diluting the case with the term pedo.

      • Candikat says:

        But, BettyRose, would you use “rapist” to describe a person who physically but not sexually abuses others? Because it’s a strong word for a vile crime?

        My point is not that Andy’s behaviour is defensible. It’s not. Having sex with a trafficked 17 yo (AKA raping her) is a vile, disgusting, unutterably selfish and destructive act that deserves prosecution, punishment, and public shaming. But to get that result (prosecution, conviction in a court of law) we have to use the right terms, or we play into the hands of those who support him and people like him.

        That’s all I’m saying, and maybe I’m being too pedantic. FWIW, I’ll call Epstein a predatory pedophile all day long, because the evidence suggests that he was, along with being a general dumpster fire of a human being. Andrew appears to be a similarly despicable dumpster fire of a human. We can agree there, and agree to disagree on what we call him. I’ve got other hills to die on.

      • Liz version 700 says:

        Queen Betty Petty … that made me laugh so hard it is piercingly accurate.

      • Becks1 says:

        Yeah, this is a weird argument that’s been playing out on this post and other posts lately about what is the “correct” term to call andy. Of all the issues in this whole situation, that’s the least of my concerns.

    • Fabuleuse15 says:

      aquarius64 Even funnier is that even the haters are not asking to ban Meghan. I follow most of the Meghan hater podcasts. What they’re bitching about is the possibility that Meghan might defy TQ and not show up.

      • GuestWho says:

        That’s because those delusional witches are hoping the crowds boo Meghan. Which is what I think the Fail is hoping too and are whipping up the hate extra hard beforehand. What a nightmare. Meghan is clearly a much stronger woman than I.

      • Bella DuPont says:

        After 3 years of solid, wall to wall smearing from the British press, Meghan’s numbers are still fairly strong. 25% of people have a negative opinion of her. 44% think positively of her and the rest (27%) are indifferent.

        And think how rough her press has been lately. She is NOT widely hated in the UK, that’s just what the press are determined for you to think.

    • Lara K says:

      can’t we just call Andrew Anus Horribilis?

  12. OriginalLala says:

    I hope that this whole situation (how theyve treated Meghan whilst protecting Andy ..etc etc) revs up some anti-monarchy sentiment because it’s really exposed their awfulness. It’s time for this family of leeches to be gone.

    • Becks1 says:

      I agree with this completely. The Queen is being petty re: Sussexit (or the courtiers are, with all the leaking and sniping in the press). But I think that would be looked at differently, even by those of us who are pro Sussex, were it not for the Andrew “thing.” That really colored how I view everything from the Queen. She can ride to church with Andrew to show support, but cant stage a photo op with H&M, even though she acknowledges the “intense scrutiny” they received? Andrew is still HRH The Duke of York, but she has let the papers whisper for the past 6 weeks about the Sussexes losing their HRH? etc.

      I think for many people who are even halfway watching, whatever the opinion on Meghan/Harry, the treatment of Andrew by the royals is just a stark contrast that makes them look REALLY bad.

      • GuestOne says:

        @Becks1 saw a headline about a major hint that the Queen would step down next year. It’s the Express so didn’t click& could be garbage but reminded me of your theory about the 1 year review & the Firm possibly wanting Harry back to help support Charles.

        The Andrew bus stunt wasn’t reported widely. I think it works for the press AND palace to focus on the Sussexes for clicks& for cover for other royals & think protecting Andrew is her priority as a mother but also more serious damage to the crown. Rebecca English said there was a palace briefing this morning so expect more leaks

      • Becks1 says:

        @guestone – I love that other people take my conspiracy theory even slightly seriously, lol!

        The only reason I even have that theory is because for decades the narrative has been that the queen would never step down, that “abdication” is a dirty word, etc. So to suddenly have had even on story circulating that the queen would consider stepping back officially at 95 is interesting. And then Peter Hunt’s tweet last week also went in that direction, specifically referencing the queen’s birthday.

        I always thought the one year review was more about Charles than the Queen. I think Charles knows how bad this looks for the monarchy and wants the Sussexes back. I think he should have taken steps to prevent Sussexit, and he failed to support them, but I think at least at this point he probably has an idea of how this looks – and I think he knows how bad the Andrew situation is.

      • Feeshalori says:

        @Becks1, by the Queen stepping back will that mean Charles would be officially named as Regent?

      • Becks1 says:

        @Freesha – I think so but I am far from a monarchy expert, lol.

        I know everyone says its never going to happen, which is why that random story that specifically mentioned it being “considered” around the time of her 95th birthday seemed out of nowhere.

    • PrincessK says:

      I really hope that the Sussex supporters will come out and cheer for them at these upcoming public events. I will be at Westminster Cathedral for sure. Why can’t we mobilise more support for them here in the U.K.?

  13. Aa says:

    The poor decision making of the Queen going back to getting played by Boris is exposed.
    How weak Charles is in all of this isn’t a good reminder of the past either. He and his staff have been so conditioned over the last two decades of avoiding any direct confrontation with William because of fears about his greater popularity that they didn’t understand that the dynamic had changed and stuck to not challenging Will directly. Your two children are openly fighting for months and you have the power of check book over them and still you don’t step in. It is hilarious how Meghan actually was bringing Harry closer to his father then suddenly William for the first time in his life seemed to care about being seen to have a good relationship with his father. If they like the wheelchair basketball photo ops they should be thanking Meghan for sparking Will’s jealousy.

  14. Busyann says:

    Tell me again what is the point of this family?

    • Scollins says:

      Yeah, I’d also like to know.

    • Mumbles says:

      While there is a lot of fondness for the Queen among the older set because of their shared experience of the war and the post-war austerity, that generation’s ranks are thinning. Diana might have extended the lifespan of the institution had not driven her out. And maybe William could have picked up her standard but his laziness and entitlement prevented that. I think Charles has a lot on his hands if he wants to justify this institution going forward.

      • Digital Unicorn says:

        Chuck will have a lot of cleaning up to do when he takes the throne – the damage that’s being done to the institution now will reverberate through a few more generations and repairing it will go beyond his reign (if the BRF exists after him).

        Part of William’s bitterness is that there is NO way out for him now – he could have walked away and passed the throne onto Harry but thats never going to happen now. William is stuck with a role he never wanted and if he thinks there is a change Harry and his line will take over he will burn the whole thing down out of spite. The question is will Charles have the balls to do what is need to ensure the Monarchy survives his eldest son and his bratty behaviour? Part of me thinks this is what the 12 month review period is about – Chuck knows HE needs them as deep down he knows William will be a terrible King.

      • (TheOG) jan90067 says:

        William could walk, any time. But the throne goes to George, then Char, then Louis, in that order. As George is a minor, a regent would be put in place for him until he is of age to make his own decision to abdicate the throne for himself. At least that’s been my understanding. William could only pull his branch out completely BEFORE the kids were born. Now that they’re here… Harry is still 6th in line (unless, God forbid! something happens to any of them. As much as I dislike William, I wouldn’t wish that on him or his kids!)

      • notasugarhere says:

        William can remove himself and his children from the succession as long as they are under the age of 18 when it happens. If he were to walk, why would anyone think he could raise children to function in the monarchy anyway? ‘I won’t do it, I’ll condemn you to the life I hate, but I’ll train you for it?’. It doesn’t work.

      • Nic919 says:

        William would never walk. His whole identity is being the heir to the heir and he’s never developed an identity otherwise. He will just do a half ass job if the monarchy exists by the time it’s his turn. He’s already lowered the expectations of the workload and will just continue to do that.

      • Fabuleuse15 says:

        I expect Charles to seek public acceptance by planting stories of how TQ made the difficult decision to step down because she believes he is better suited to handle the current crisis and repair the damages done to the monarchy by her mishandling of those crises. TQ will be said to regret not having made Charles king a lot sooner.

        I also expect Charles will throw momman under the bus to gain public sympathy by showing that TQ was a deeply flawed mother to him. I expect to see a slew of stories of Charles’ childhood that focus on TQ as a cold and neglectful mother to Charles.

    • Coco says:

      Without them, the commemorative plate industry would collapse.

  15. Aria says:

    She was hurt really I dont buy it. Her secretary may aware of smear campaign and as woman of 93 who claim to love Sussex, she did nothing and sit and watch. Same for Kate, no amount of survey and pr is going to help her image. This prove that she is not capable to hold the role of royal patronage, one of her charity is closed which is horrible. With her popularity only 200k people took that survey that too many non uk fans. Time and time again is said that cambridge doesnt have young voters of uk which Sussex have. Those polls are manipulated by rr and those sugar article does her nothing. The people will fed up with her in few years because she doesnt have any substance. Dress up doll will be tiresome and no authenticity people will lose interest.

  16. Rapunzel says:

    Lol…of course grandma doesnt wanna talk about it.
    1. She knows she messed up and every time she says something re: the Sussexes, she just looks bad.
    2. She’d rather talk about her “rock” PedoAndy.
    3. Harry was her fav grandson, and she is pissed he’s taken Meg’s side vs. the family.
    4. She’s stuck with Wills only now, and he probably gets peeved every time Gan Gan talks about someone other than him and Keen Qween Kathy.
    5. She knows, cause Harry probably told her when he arrived early for the summit, that if she’d just opened her mouth once to stop the RRs, he’d have maybe stayed.
    6. The more this talked about, the more it is likely that people will compare the treatment of Sussexit to the treatment of Andy, and call for his head.

    And Most Important:

    7. The more Sussexit is discussed, the more other ills in the family might come to light… like what they’ve used the Sussexes to distract from. TQ does not want us to know that “if only you knew” Harry hinted at!

    Ultimately, this is not TQ being petty Betty. This is Gan Gan telling Harry, “boy, you keep your mouth shut, or I’m gonna really hurt you.”

    • Amy Too says:

      #7: exactly. There is something going on that is so bad that they want to hide or prevent so much, that they’ve calculated that the hit the monarchy is taking for treating the Sussexes so badly is somehow better than the hit they would take if The Thing came out or happened. What is The Thing, though? You would think harboring a pedophile might be it but they really don’t seem to care about that at all. Maybe it’s a Cambridge divorce due to adultery that they’re trying to prevent? Maybe it’s the knowledge that will and Kate have allow the Middletons to run their PR and leak like crazy for the last decade that they’re trying to hide? Maybe it’s the entire family rallying very hard to get Harry not to marry Meghan: complete with racist language and messages, encouraging bad dad Markle, trying to block her visa or citizenship application? I don’t know. I feel like it’s something that either hasn’t come out at all in the media yet, or something that we heard the barest little bit about (tip of the iceberg) and no one really caught on or explored it further.

      • Belli says:

        There have been hints that there’s something big behind the scenes that can’t be talked about for legal reasons. I don’t know what could be worse than Andrew’s actions beyond worse offences against children and murder, but the royals have been awful throughout history.

      • SIPNBUBBLY says:

        @Amy Too – I agree with you that it has to be something really bad that could cause major damage to the monarchy. Tom Bradby, the guy who did H&M’s South Africa documentary, said in an interview that The Thing didn’t involve Harry or Meghan or Andrew. That leaves William and/or Charles. My theory is that maybe William is still fighting a legal battle to keep his affair out of the press.
        Maybe the press has proof and will use it in retaliation to the Sussex’ lawsuit. I imagine the media had reassurances from the palace that Meghan wouldn’t sue. H&M have blocked them from making a lot of money off them and Archie. The media feels like they are owed.

      • Emmitt says:

        I don’t think any of the senior royals (including William) said anything outwardly racist to Harry about Meghan before the wedding. If anything, it would’ve been coded language.

        I do think senior royals (pick one) did coordinate the emergence of Thomas Markle & his shenanigans with the tabloids the week of the wedding to stop the wedding …HARRY found out about it…and I think this is what the reporter back in September was alluding to something nasty going down right before the wedding.

        If the “Big Legal Thing” doesn’t involve Harry, Meghan or Andrew, then it would involve the Queen, Charles or William. I doubt the BLT involves the Queen or Charles; I think it has to do with William & Kate’s foundation and how the money is handled. Meghan probably saw how the money was being mismanaged, told Harry and they needed to separate themselves from William & Kate so they aren’t implicated in the future. If Harry & Meghan had stayed with the foundation, the mismanagement would’ve come to light and Meghan would’ve been blamed for it (and possibly criminally charged, with charges being dropped in exchange for divorcing Harry and leaving the UK and Archie behind).

      • I still think — this unspeakable, jeopardizing Legal Thing that Bradby and several others have alluded to —— is a misuse of funds by what is now the Cambridge’s Foundation. Because it is so top secret, I think William’s fingerprints must be all over whatever was illegally done and there is hard, admissible evidence. One of them did mention the Firm was desperately working hard and using massive energy trying to keep it out of the courts.
        Or, —- serious tin foil hat theory —- maybe it has to do with culpability in the death of Diana. Now that would be something that could rock the monarchy!

      • Tessa says:

        RE The horrid Hewitt rumors, Does anyone really think that Charles would want another man’s child even being in line for the throne. Diana was ditched by Charles and moved on to Hewitt Fall 1986, it was sometime after the York Wedding. No way is Hewitt Harry’s father. It’s another sample though of Harry being thrown to the wolves.

      • Lady D says:

        I know this is petty, but I think it would be freaking great if William was being blackmailed by the press over the lawsuit he helped create the reasons for.

      • Candikat says:

        @ AmyToo: I wonder! I tend to think it was blatant racism, that Will (or someone) said something to the effect of “(WOC/Americans/actresses) are fine for playing with, but you don’t marry them, old chap.” And then when Harry pressed on that person made it clear that Meghan’s race made her unsuitable. I’ve heard rumours that M&H would have liked Archie to have a title, or at the very least wouldn’t have rejected one, and that a fully British/lily white child of Harry’s would have been given one without question. And that the courtiers, tacitly supported by the Q, made it clear that under no circumstances would a biracial child be given or allowed to use a royal title.

        Is this true? I dunno. But it would surely be enough for Harry to nope out of there, it’s a Thing big enough to sink the BRF, and the timeline fits.

      • MsIam says:

        @Emmitt, I agree with the theory that the royals are behind the promoting of “Bad Dad”. I’m not sure what they hoped to accomplish other than embarrassing Meg. Why would they think him not coming would cause the wedding to be called off? Even if Charles didn’t walk Meghan down the aisle, she could have walked by herself or with her mother. I think Thomas came up with the fake heart attack on his own. But I do believe the royals have been encouraging him to try and ruin her reputation. Unfortunately for them he is such a demonstrably awful person that he has garnered minimal sympathy for himself and more for Meghan. The only folks supporting him other than Piers Morgan are the nutcases.

      • February Pisces says:

        @emmitt I think it’s way worse than that. Don’t get me wrong, they are probably fiddling the books at their foundation, but if that ever came to light they could easily throw one of their employees under the bus and plea ignorance. Whatever it is, it’s up there with murder, rape, child abuse, extortion, fraud etc. It would be something the monarchy could never bounce back from. Remember when Diana’s letter was revealed that her ‘husband was planning an accident, break failure’, that got swept under the rug by the press and they carried on like normal. So I it has to be really REALLY bad.

      • Amy Too says:

        What if it’s Will and Kate paying bad dad WITH foundation money? So the money Meghan was making ended up going to her dad so he would smear her? I can’t imagine how much of a betrayal that would be.

    • Becks1 says:

      @Rapunzel – another comment I agree with completely, yours and @AmyToo.

      Amy’s line – “they’ve calculated that the hit the monarchy is taking for treating the Sussexes so badly is somehow better than the hit they would take if The Thing came out or happened” makes me think that “The Thing” is also the leverage Harry had over the Firm.

      But like we all keep asking – what is The Thing? I know people keep talking about money and the foundations, but I don’t think that would be a huge scandal, unless the royals were taking donations to directly pay for their helicopters or whatever. I think a potential Cambridge divorce makes the most sense, because the only thing William and Kate have going for them as future monarchs is their image of the perfect happy family. That is something the royal family would protect – they wouldn’t care about William cheating, but they would care about the image.

      But I feel like Sussexit is making the royals look a lot worse than a Cambridge divorce would, so again, like we were saying yesterday – what would be worse than this?

      Maybe it really is just a matter of financials or a divorce or whatever, and coupled with the royal family’s sheer ineptitude at PR, it looks like something way worse than it actually is.

      • Digital Unicorn says:

        I think the ‘thing’ is a really bad falling out with the brothers, one where any chance of repairing the relationship or even working together in some way will never ever happen because of what went down. I think there has been a deep betrayal – a betrayal that will be hard to recover from.

        This has always been about Harry and William – something cataclysmic has gone down.

      • aria says:

        maybe William has a secret love child which is a huge disaster because then the child must be included in the line os succession which changes everything and pr nightmare for the royal family. There will be so many debates will take place where to include that child in the line, ignoring the child will cause a huge backlash.

      • GuestWho says:

        @aria. An illegitimate child would never be considered for the line of succession. But it would still be a HUGE nightmare for the RF. And really, really kinda funny for the rest of us.

      • aria says:

        guest who but we are living in 21 century and there are many illegitimate child in that family. I personally believe that prince Andrew is not Philip’s son, if harry truly is not Charles son, the rr might leak that crap all over the world because that loathe that much of harry. But rr is not touching that because it might open a can of worms which rf doesn’t want. But pushing the child and keeping away from throne will also cost the monarchy. My money is on love child because of this current situation with everything happening in the world, ppl don’t give a crap about Cambridge divorce, also when Meghan and harry step down, the public said we have to do what makes us happy, so divorce won’t be huge factor. plus this is not first divrce in royal family. The huge scandal will be the love child.

      • (TheOG) jan90067 says:

        Aria, if you are alluding to Harry being the son of Hewitt, he was TWO YEARS OLD when Diana met Hewitt. She engaged him to give the boys riding lessons.

        Google pics of a young Prince Philip, and Harry. PP, with his reddish beard, and Harry are dead ringers. Here, I did it for you; scroll down the page to see the side-by-side pics of them: identical!


      • aria says:

        theOG sorry if i didnt make it clear, i have my doubts on harry but lately he is having the windsor baldness like charles and rest of windsor but prince andrew is surely not philip son. I was saying if harry is not truly Charles son then with the current press against Sussex they might openly leak or even wiliam will give permission for that route. But rr is not touching that shows harry is charles son , plus if they open that can of worms royal family many dark secrets will come out and harry knows where the born are buried.

      • GG says:

        @Becks1 I honestly believe “The Thing” has something to do with Charles, his past and the Royal Rota. If I were Harry, I would personally take issue with my father having the power to modify, remove or at the very least rebuke the people bullying his daughter in law. Especially as we disseminate information so much differently in 2020. There was a real a opportunity to change the relationship with the press (H&M couldn’t even post on IG using snaps of themselves doing their work without the RR using them first). Charles didn’t take that opportunity. So my ask is why? If he REALLY did want to keep them in the Royal fold, quit having Andrew pester about him tagging in Poor Beatrice and Euginie, quit having his son hate him, why didn’t he do that? What does Charles stand to lose if he pushes back from the Royal Rota? I’d bet he has quite a few more skeletons in his closet than Camilla Parker Bowles.

      • Becks1 says:

        I am torn because I agree with both Digital Unicorn that this is about the brothers – the “thing” is whatever caused the falling out. I like the Tinfoil Tiara Theory below about the Cambridges trying to stop the wedding, but maybe that tiara doesn’t quite fit.

        But I also see @GG’s point that this could be about Charles. If the rota has something on Charles and that forces him to play ball – I can see Harry being hurt that Charles isn’t willing to take a stand to protect him and Meghan. But, I can also see that being true if the secret isn’t about Charles. For example, just to use the most common theory, but if the RRs all know about William and Rose Hanbury, maybe it wasn’t just William determined to keep it out of the press, maybe Charles pulled some strings too to protect the heir, and Harry was ticked that Charles refused to do the same for him. But in my theory, Charles has basically used his leverage to protect William and is unable to protect Harry as well. He has to give the rota something, and here it was Harry.

        I dunno. My conspiracy theories are getting all jumbled in my head, lol. At least we can all agree that there is a “Thing” and maybe one day it will all be out in the open.

      • windyriver says:

        @DU, @Becks1 etc – I’ve also been leaning towards the idea that it’s something between the brothers.

        But – does anyone remember exactly what Harry said about William in the Bradby Africa piece? Only had time for a quick search and only saw reports about Harry talking about his mother, and what Meghan said. But my recollection is, he said some semi-positive things about William, about them being on different paths, but he had his back, (possibly) hoped William had his, etc. That was in what, October? So, makes me wonder how that fits in. If I’m right, not sure Harry would have said that if he and William were so seriously on the outs. And from what we’ve heard, it sounds like the discussions of Harry and Meghan going part-time started some months before that.

        I could be totally wrong, but it just sticks in my mind as a question mark in what we’re discussing here…

      • notasugarhere says:

        When Harry was already two-years-old, Diana chose to have an affair with a man who looked like a young version of her father. Right down to her father’s red hair. Google pictures of John Spencer at his first wedding and Hewitt. Diana had issues.

      • Tessa says:

        notsosugar, Diana liked Hewitt because she for one was said to have liked that he was in the military. I don’t think he looked like her father. He turned out to be a scoundrel but Diana was besotted with him at the outset of the relationship. There seems to have been more attention paid to the resemblance between Charles partner Camilla and his much loved Nanny Mabel.

        DIana had no real ‘type.’ She loved Khan who looked nothing like her father.

      • Nic919 says:

        The big legal thing isn’t a Cambridge divorce or love child. They’ve dealt with high level divorce before and illegitimate children wouldn’t cause a split between Harry and William like this. This is foundation related and a personal element between Harry and William thrown in, possibly relating to Meghan, but it’s definitely something that struck at the core of the fraternal relationship.

      • Becks1 says:

        @Windyriver – that’s a good point, but I also wonder what else would Harry have said. He couldn’t say “my brother is a total a-hole and at some point you all are going to realize that.” But the part about having his back and hoping William had his – that makes me think Sussexit was already being discussed (well we know it was) and he hoped William would support him through it. I don’t know.

      • Becks1 says:

        @Nic – I don’t think it would be the Cambridge divorce itself, but any action taken to protect the Cambridges. Like we know William threatened the media over the mere mention of Rose Hanbury, I wonder if he took other steps to protect his image as well. But I also think the rift was clear before that so I don’t think it can be as simple as that.

        I wonder if it IS as simple as – lots of little things building up, the brothers have a blow up fight, and – to go back to Tom Bradby – things were said that could never be unsaid. So the actual underlying issues aren’t necessarily a “Thing” but the fight itself is.

        I don’t know. Like I keep saying – it could be so many things, and our imaginations are running wild at this point lol – but we do know there is “something” and I think DU and Nic are right that it comes down to the brothers.

      • Daenerys says:

        A royal love child may be The THING!

      • Marie says:

        I think Harry gave a very neutral answer regarding William in the South Africa documentary. He wasn’t going to say how bad things are, that would give the press too much ammunition. He said he loves his brother
        (which I believe) but I don’t think he likes him or trusts him or wants him in his life. I think their bond is broken.
        I believe Meghan loves her Dad but doesn’t trust him or want him in her life.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Tessa, look for photos of Johnny Spencer and Hewitt laughing. Same mouth, lines around the mouth, nose, eyebrows, forehead, eyes, red hair.

      • MsIam says:

        The reporter that was on a talk show the other day alluded to “The Thing” being A: some type of legal matter and B: it would shed light on why H&M are stepping away. I don’t see how William’s divorce would factor in on this. Why would him having an affair or divorcing cause H&M to leave? I think it is related to the lawsuit and payoffs, maybe illegal hacking into emails or phone messages, things that could be considered criminal in nature. Plus the nutjobs on twitter and in the press keep saying Harry and Meg are blackmailing the queen. If that is true, I think it would be about more than William’s willy. They have been through that already with Charles. But proof of criminal activity might be something new.

      • Becks1 says:

        @MsIam –

        I only think the divorce would factor in (or the affair, I should say) in terms of what was done to cover it up. Maybe at that point there were some payoffs, or some damning emails or texts exchanged between KP/CH and members of the press. But I don’t think “The Thing” is “just” trouble in Cambridge paradise.

        But I think you have a good point about it possible being something that is actually criminal.

      • What. . .now? says:

        @nota – I looked up the pics of Hewitt and Daddy Spencer — and whoa, I definitely see a resemblance between the men.

        Do you think this is why the Hewitt speculation won’t “die down” so to speak? Hewitt looks like her Father, and Harry resembles her side of the family to an extent–i.e. Harry looks like Hewitt?

        I think though at his age right now, he most looks like his grandfather did in that Paris Match photo. Right down to the smile. . .

      • Tessa says:

        notasugar, John Spencer was heavyset. Hewitt is thinner but as he grew older he grew rather “jaded” looking and to me on the Sleazy side. John Spencer never got the “jaded” looks that Hewitt got. And Diana’s most serious relationship (Khan) did not look at all like her father.

    • Ainsley7 says:

      In context, Harry’s statement was either about his mother’s treatment by the press or the courtiers/family leaking to the press. Possibly both since leaks to the press by the courtiers/family could have lead to her being hounded by the press.

    • Anonymous says:

      Harry looks like a Mountbatten.

      The Thing is said to:
      Have legal implications.
      Not about Andrew
      Drive sympathy toward Harry and Meghan.

      William having an affair drives sympathy towards Kate.
      Charles leaking to the rota is nowhere near as bad as Andrew.
      The royals dissing Meghan before the wedding would please Brexiteers.
      Who cares if the Middleton’s run King William’s PR machine.

      The Thing has to be a lot worst than any of these theories.

      • Again, I say, could this be about culpability in the death of Diana?

      • notasugarhere says:

        Harry also looks like Queen Mary/May of Teck.

      • Sunday says:

        I think that whatever The Thing may be, what drives sympathy toward Harry and Meghan is the fact that they’ve been used as the scape goats to draw media fire in an attempt to cover up The Thing, no matter the cost to their mental health, privacy or safety. I think we all agree that is 100% what’s been happening, that one or all of the RF factions (BP, KP, CH etc) decided at some point that they would be the sacrificial lambs.

        As for The Thing itself, I think that the only scandals that would really threaten the monarchy would either have to do with the line of succession in some way (will having a child older than George out there somewhere, charles and/or the queen being ill) or something specific relating to Diana. Mismanagement of charitable funds by the queen/charles/kp is a distant possibility, but it would have to be extremely severe because the queen was basically exposed in the panama papers and that barely made the news. I do think it’s interesting that Harry referred to himself as the second son of Diana and has been talking about her quite a lot recently; obviously she’s his mom and he can mention her whenever he wishes to, but it could be a rather pointed dig/reminder to the RF that he knows what they’ve done.

    • BabsORIG says:

      Or maybe”the thing” is what BOTH Harry AND Andrew have and holding over the family. They’re going out of their way to protect Andrew, maybe they consider Andrew to be a looser canon than Harry. Harry has his little young family to protect, Andrew OTOH could burn the entire thing down anytime, he has nothing to lose.

      • notasugarhere says:

        The Queen’s protection of her rapist son, and what Harry knows about that covering up, may be what burns it all down. Andrew continuing to exist, with his titles, in Royal Lodge, front and centre with his mother? That is what is burning down the monarchy. There’s nothing Andrew has over them – the cover up of his crimes and keeping him from justice is a major part of the problem.

  17. M says:

    I can’t imagine how painful this must be for Harry and Meghan. To have these people consistently put “the brand” over your well-being and safety is absolutely disgusting. The fact that people are calling them ungrateful and childish really upsets me as well. If you had experienced the constant hammering from the press and your own family for the last few years, you’d try your damnedest to get out too.

    I wish they would have never agreed to hang around for these next events. It should have been a “kiss my whole ass” and then nothing from them.

    In trying to do right by themselves and their child, they are still being smeared. America might have a bigger race problem, but at least we know it. Britain likes to pretend none of this has to do with race, when that is the base of all of it. It’s shameful.

  18. Sofia says:

    Well Lizzie, I’ve taken it personally how you keep protecting your pedo son but I definitely do want to keep talking about it

  19. Val says:

    Evil truly persists, doesn’t it? How is someone this mean and evil allowed to have the kind of life that she has? Why is she still even here? Why is she still relevant and allowed to let racism shine? I really do hate the lot of them. I hope that they reap what they sow times 100.

  20. ab says:

    “Liz of House Petty” lmao!

  21. L84Tea says:

    QEII not wanting to talk about all her problems is the very reason she has so many problems.

  22. Nina says:

    Too bad she did not take the racist slurs aimed at Meghan and Archie that seriously.

  23. Mads says:

    I found out today that the Queen is patron of an organization where Lord Rothermire (owner of the Mail and others) is president. It raises the question as to why she didn’t have a quiet word with him about the constant negative coverage in his papers towards Harry and Meghan, especially as she was aware that it was bad enough to push Harry to want to leave the “Firm”.

    • GuestWho says:

      I read that too. I think it just points to the fact that she had the connections and power to stop it and, instead, encouraged it. Did you also see the photo of Charles and Piers yucking it up in a receiving line? That’s gotta sting for H&M. These people are truly horrific human beings. I think it comes down to the fact that they wanted Meghan gone and didn’t think Harry would go with her. Someone here reminded us the other day that Andrew in fact caved to that kind of pressure and divorced the red-headed grifter when he didn’t really want to. I guess they didn’t realize that Harry is just a better/stronger person than the rest of them. So gross.

      • (TheOG) jan90067 says:

        Or they do, and they’re eaten alive with jealousy.

      • Guest Who —- Was it a recent photo of Charles laughing and talking pleasantly with Piers? If so, and I was Meghan or Harry and I saw that photo —- that would be so unbelievable an act of public and personal betrayal I don’t think I could have one more moment in my life to waste on Charles.

      • Tessa says:

        William I think will avoid Piers. Piers “tricked” William and he quoted things William said when Diana met with Piers for lunch and brought William. William does not like such invasions of privacy.

      • GuestWho says:

        @JA – and what happens when you (I) assume?

        The photo was actually pre-wedding, early 2018. Sort of wish I’d checked that earlier. ;)

      • Lady D says:

        Don’t beat yourself up, GuestWho. At least you clarified the situation.

      • Thanks for clarifying time frame of photo GuestWho. 😘. Just the other day, I was all in to that story of Jessica copyrighting sussexglobalcharities.com which another celebitchy pointed out had been denied. I was grateful for the input. What I love about this celebitchy community is that we can discuss, agree, disagree, correct, celebrate, commiserate, and enlighten each other in a civilized dialog. Team Kaiser and Team Celebitchy!

    • HK9 says:

      Even if she didn’t have ‘connections’ it wouldn’t matter because she’s The Queen-she IS the ultimate connection. She could’ve called anyone at anytime to shut this down and she didn’t.

      • Elisa says:

        spot on.

      • Daisy A says:

        I don’t think the Queen has leverage over the press. I lived in the UK during the original Annus Horibilis, the press treatment of Charles, Diana, Camilla and Fergie was crueler and more intrusive than the treatment of Meghan and Harry. Private calls were taped and rebroadcast, private photos were mysteriously found and available to the public. Other family members have also been subjected to intrusive and humiliating coverage over the years, including nude photos and entrapment. I think she sees it as an awful but inevitable part of royal life which needs to be endured and ignored.

    • Guest with Cat says:

      Oh goodness! It just gets worse and worse.

    • notasugarhere says:

      There’s also the long-time connection of Rose Hanbury to someone at the Fail. She was the woman’s intern years ago iirc. Photographed together at the opening of Parliament. Has Rose been feeding stories to the Fail for William, in exchange for the Fail covering up their escapades in the fields in Norfolk.

      • Beach Dreams says:

        I think you’re talking about Sarah Vine? Rose walked into the state dinner with her last June; she interned for her husband Michael Gove. Rose and William probably share similar political views.

  24. Pleasantly Lost says:

    New in the comments… but I have been watching and I really think beyond being a racist a$$hat, she is punishing the Sussexes partially because of what her uncle did to her father. She always was taught to and believe that her uncle’s abdication killed her father. I think that type of abandonment was always going to be the ultimate trigger for her. Add to it that a bi-racial woman was involved and the gloves came off.

    • SIPNBUBBLY says:

      +1 This could sorta feel like deja vu to her and a betrayal.

      • (TheOG) jan90067 says:

        Very astute conclusion, Pleasantly Lost.

        Although Harry leaving the family will not have the same repercussions that her uncle leaving did, but it could still be a twisted connection in her psyche. Still, NOT a reason to do what she (and she’s allowed to be) done.

    • Deering24 says:

      Add to that Edward’s abdication forced George (and her) into a royal life she never wanted, and…yeah, I could see her lashing out bigtime.

      • (TheOG) jan90067 says:

        But Harry’s leaving is not forcing anyone into anything, other than actually doing their *own* jobs. He’s not foisting anything onto anyone (other than actual *real* work).. oh wait… That’s right. Wandering Willie and Katie Keen don’t want to do actual work!

        Never mind 😄

      • Becks1 says:

        Well, she was always going to have a royal life. Edward and Wallis never had any kids, Elizabeth was next in line to the throne after her father passed (if Edward hadnt abdicated). it just would have been 20 years later, and for that duration, she still would have been the heir apparent (presumptive? I forget the difference) so while her life may not have been what she expected, she was still going to be on the throne.

        Plus, Harry isn’t abdicating. Harry walking away really doesn’t have any impact on any member of the royal family besides the current optics. the queen’s duties are still her duties, Charles’s duties are still his, etc. Maybe they have less people to do the bread and butter engagements, but H&M weren’t pulling in huge numbers at this point so really, its not that big a deal from that perspective. They have one less person to attend formal receptions or whatever, but that’s not a huge deal in the scheme of things.

        Harry still has his place in the line of succession, Harry and Meghan are still going to do charity work, etc. The person this impacts the most is William, because he and Kate are going to face increased scrutiny, especially in terms of their workload, but overall……the royal family is going to keep on keeping on like it always has.

        Now, I can see how she would ticked if she views it as Harry abandoning his royal duty, but this isn’t going to force anyone into an early grave.

      • Tessa says:

        The Queen as a child was quite proud that she was close in line of succession even before the Abdication. And would tell Margaret that she was third in line and Margaret fourth.

    • Spikey says:

      Yes, this sounds very plausible. Even if Harry isn’t “abdicating” he’s demonstrably turning his back on The Crown. (I strongly recommend Nation by Terry Pratchett for an astute take on the concept of The Crown! It’s also a very sweet and hopeful book.) That has to sting for a woman who gave up (was forced to give up) everything for an idea.

      • GuestWho says:

        I think, rather, that the crown turned its back on Harry and actively! set out to destroy his wife. That probably stings more.

  25. KellyRyan says:

    Has anyone seen the film, The Queen, with Helen Mirren, 2006. It’s a good example of Queenie’s isolation, insulation and lack of concern for others. She had to be told Diana was popular and known as The People’s Princess. Her life and order of importance, BRF and Corgi’s.

    • (TheOG) jan90067 says:

      I think her horses come first.. then the corgis… THEN the BRF.

    • Sunday says:

      I think you’re on to something, Kelly. I think that people who’ve been following this sometimes expect the queen to be privy to every gory detail of the abuse that Meghan has suffered, but I don’t think that’s the case at all. The Queen isn’t exactly reading comments on Instagram or checking to see what Charles’ comms guy is liking on Twitter. She relies on her courtiers to summarize the current goings on and to provide her with clips/articles that may be relevant. She has done this for decades. Imagine how easy it would be to manipulate the thinking of someone if you and your team of grey men were responsible for providing her the materials that tell her how to think on a daily basis? Imagine how different that person would feel if they were provided only the Guardian versus only the Sun, or in the US only the Washington Post versus only Fox News.

      I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the queen’s longtime private secretary was forced out in 2017 after serving her for 10 years. Ever since then it’s been a series of catastrophic leaks from the various houses being poorly patched over by a chaotic mess of barely coherent PR spin.

      • Elisa says:

        I think it’s not only her handlers keeping info away from her, IMO she simply doesn’t care. Otherwise she would have acted differently a long time ago regarding the smears against Meghan etc.
        BTW: her secretary was forced out by Charles.

      • Forced out by Charles, which opens another whole can of worms. This family is like a mating nest of poisonous snakes. They are so wrapped up together it’s hard to tell one from the other.

      • Amy Too says:

        I think the queen spends a lot of time with and values Andrew. I can imagine that she’s quite insulated, not caring about or understanding how social media works, not really ever thinking anything could be crisis enough to actually ruin the RF. And I think she feels bad about making Andrew step down, so she gives him what he wants in other ways. And what he wants is for the Sussexes to be punished for their popularity, pushed out, and kept out forever so he or his daughters can take their place. And with Andrew not doing any of his usual work anymore, he’s spending lots of time with the Queen.

        I imagine that even the queens “advisors” don’t actually advise her that much. I bet it’s the same way for most of the palaces. The Queen or will and Kate or Charles come up with their own plan based on whatever and then their advisors and PR people try to spin it in the best light and mitigate any damage it causes. Think about how many advisors, secretaries, staff, and experts Katie keen has and yet she still does so little and the things she does are stupid and ineffectual beyond all belief.

  26. Florence says:

    Gosh I wish this old bag would be quiet, her and her keen leakers. She won’t come out against a paedophile so she’s irrelevant now.

  27. Marie says:

    The RF has shown that they don’t care at all for the ‘married ins’ they are expendable. All they care about is protecting the blood royals. It’s disgusting. It doesn’t matter what Andrew has done, the Queen will stop at nothing to protect him even if that means throwing Meghan to the wolves. As they say, this isn’t a family but a firm. I’m so glad Harry and Meghan got out.

  28. Who ARE These People? says:

    Lung cancer killed her father, yes? A little education and some therapy would have gone a long way. And if anyone or anything has exploited the monarchy for personal gain, it’s the monarch herself.

    • (TheOG) jan90067 says:

      Yes, he smoked like a chimney. Lung cancer, heart disease… sure, he may not’ve had the disposition to be King, but the disease killed him young, far earlier than the stress would’ve.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Didn’t one of his doctors tell him the smoke was good, calming for his lungs/breathing, and would help with his stutter?

      • (TheOG) jan90067 says:

        Back then, probably (even though it has been proven NOW that tobacco companies knew, even back in the 40s that tobacco was carcinogenic).

      • Deering24 says:

        And some people smoke to relieve stress, so it could have been one deadly loop for George.

  29. Aurora says:

    I read a good theory that the Royal family set up the pre-wedding photo ops and paid Thomas Markle to fake a heart attack in hopes of stopping the wedding. Thomas let it slip that he’s been in contact with the Cambridges press secretary Jason. Thomas also keeps saying the royals “owe” him.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      And I hope Evil Papa Smurf spills the tea when the don’t cough up. I would not be surprised if Jason was giving him ‘advice’ on how to improve his image with the press. As we’ve been saying on here for a long time, the Cambridges were active participants in the press smearing of Meghan and at least one reporter has said that William ‘encouraged’ the press attention on her father. I can’t remember who that was.

    • Marie says:

      Some are theorizing that Will/KP paid her dad a lot of money to fake his heart attack thinking it would stop the wedding. Harry didn’t know it at the time but found out later. It’s interesting that Tom keeps saying the RF owe him.

      • Rapunzel says:

        If W & K are behind Toxic Tom’s “heart attack” that would explain a few things:

        1. Why we never heard of their being problems in the family around the wedding… until recently. It was always my opinion the drama started around the time Meg got pregnant. And I always believed that Will did something insensitive at that time. But we’ve recently heard the cracks go back all the way to the wedding. W & K trying to actually stop the wedding explains this shift. The timeline would be that at the wedding, Will was only warning/cautioning Harry about moving too fast while going behind his back to stop the wedding. So Harry and Meg had no idea how much problems were on their way. Then, when Meg got pregnant, there was probably more direct caution from Will to Harry (are you sure you want kids?) while he worked to smear Meg and drive her out (cause a miscarriage?). Then, as they prepared their lawsuit, H & M discovered what Will/Kate were actually doing. And it was over between Will & Harry. This would fit when they (H &M) started getting serious about fighting back and stopped photo ops with the fam.

        It would also explain:

        2. Why Kate seemed sartorially sloppy at the wedding… repeat white dress and unpolished hair. She wasn’t expecting an actual wedding.

        3. The Meg made Kate cry stories. . . Kate was probably not into doing Charlotte’s dress fittings because she thought the wedding wasn’t gonna happen… and Meg called her out, not understanding. Maybe Kate even hinted the wedding wouldn’t happen?

        4. Why W & K seriously seem to be having marital trouble. . . Will either blames Kate for this plan backfiring, or maybe she got tired of it and spilled the beans? Could Kate’s newfound confidence be having leverage over Wills? And maybe the reason that confidence seems waning nowadays is that she discovered her mom/sister are tied to this, and Will can now throw her to the wolves. I can see Kate thinking this was just Will’s plot, keeping quiet, using the quiet against him as leverage, only to find that she never had leverage because momma Carole and Pippa tips were Wills intermediaries. And Will’s going, “now that Harry is out, you’re next if you speak out”

        I’m thinking this theory is legit.

      • A Guest says:

        I think we can all agree that there has been a sustained and coordinated campaign of hate against Meghan complete an online social media presence. You only have to look at the responses on the Sussex Royal instagram to see hundreds of responses all saying the same thing.

        Also the moment something hits the news about the Sussex’s, gossip sites like CDAN and BG have items with the “real story”.

        Perhaps the lawsuit against the DM kicked over some rocks and something very bad slithered out.

        I’m not normally a conspiracy theorist, but it does make you wonder.

      • Marie says:

        I have always thought it was strange that Thomas never talked to the press when H&M were dating but ever since the wedding he can’t keep his mouth shut. It definitely seems like he is being bought. When H&M were first engaged there was a statement by Doria and Thomas together. Things didn’t seem bad then. It’s odd.

      • Becks1 says:

        @Rapunzel. Huh.

        On the one hand your theory seems out there and implausible, but on the other hand….it weirdly fits. Learning that William and others were actively working to prevent his marriage could be the thing that would make Harry walk away. And it would explain why things seemed “fine” around the time of the wedding between the brothers, but then after Harry found out, their relationship was over. And it would be something that Harry could never forgive.

        Honestly, their wedding day makes me sad now. I remember how happy both Harry AND William seemed when they were walking around greeting the crowds beforehand, I remember how nervous but poised Meghan was, Harry saying to her “I’m so lucky,” and just how happy and in love they were. I know they’re still in love, but they could have really lifted the royal family up and the royal family refused to allow that.

        I also feel really sad when I see pictures of them from summer 2018,where they seem happy and stress-free, and then compare that to pictures from mid to late 2019 – they start to look a little tense or self-conscious, like they know no matter what the press is going to tear them apart.

      • CynicalCeleste says:

        Regarding points 2 & 3, in fairness Kate had given birth less than 4 weeks prior, so tears and sartorial sloppiness would not be unreasonable.

      • Tessa says:

        I don’t see any growing confidence in Kate no growth, still makes those exaggerated faces and I don’t think she has had any growth it’s worse though now she’s posing as an “expert” in a field she never studied.

      • Anonymous says:

        I agree for the most part what Rapunzel said, save one. I don’t believe William ever told Harry he was moving too fast. That’s the story sold to the public. My guess? Meghan with fresh eyes felt royal foundation figures were off. William immediately sensed she would never stop asking questions. Things went downhill from there. Oh, yeah.

      • February Pisces says:

        Well I don’t think he was paid to ‘fake a heart attack’ but he was stitched up by KP who managed harry and meghan at the time. It’s funny how the DM leaked he staged the pap photos when 99% of pictures in the DM have been staged by the celeb and paps. I think they were hoping his embarrassment and no show might scupper the wedding somehow.

    • Case says:

      That would be absolutely wild. This is becoming more and more of a soap opera.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Her copyright lawsuit against the Fail should force the Fail to reveal how much money they paid that horrible man, how they groomed him by moving a female reporter to Mexico to befriend him, and if any royal houses were involved.

    • Elisa says:

      hmmm, but this would be a big story and he could make a LOT of money with it – and he hasn’t – so what is he waiting for?

  30. Chickaletta says:

    I actually wish Harry had Tina Turner’ed that sh-t and walked away with just his name. This “deal” that was made is clearly just means to still control H & M and make Harry so miserable that he “comes to his senses”, returns home and marries a boring, keen white girl. At this point honestly if I were H & M, I’d be looking into faking my own death and living a quiet, anonymous life if Montana or something, raising my kids in f–king peace.

    • Harla says:

      At one point in his life Harry expressed a desire to chuck it all, go off grid and become a tour guide in Africa, when all this was hitting the fan I wondered if he might just do that after all.

    • Where'sMyTiara says:

      Would not surprise me in the least if this is what happens at the end of the “evaluation year”.

      BELIEVE that Harry & Meghan will be evaluating the family as much as the Queen will be evaluating the value of the arrangement.

      Wouldn’t surprise me if Harry left it all and started calling people out in the fam.

  31. NotSoSocialButterfly says:

    The photo with H & M pretty much sums their feelings up nicely… Harry’s clap looks like he’s ready to box Prince Rapist’s ears.

  32. NYCGirl says:

    Can someone name one organization that allows a 93 year old to make decisions that has huge impact on so many lives….The BRF is out of touch with reality. Lizzie should retire as has Philip. The fact that NO ONE questions her mental stability is unbelievable….I mean really, who communicates their wishes by the pictures displayed on a desk.

    • Valiantly Varnished says:

      Exactly. And the pictures thing, well that’s just good old BRF passiveness. Being direct is simply too crass

  33. Case says:

    SHE is hurt? Oh boy.

  34. Emmitt says:

    “The courtiers were mad that Sussexit was announced in the first place”

    It wouldn’t have been announced had a) Charles met with Harry b) the Queen met with Harry c) William hadn’t told Dan Wooten d) Dan Wooten published the speculation the Sussexes were leaving.

    “By ruling against their use of the Sussex Royal brand, she drew the line on exploiting their royal connection for profit,”

    Yet every other member of the royal family can profit from their royal connection. Got it.

    “The Queen has taken everything “personally”:

    I’m sure Harry took it personally when the Queen, Charles, William etc. turned their backs on Meghan. I’m sure he also takes it personally when they’ve made it clear HE is welcome to come back. Not those other two.

    “The Queen yanked the Sussexes ‘royal’ branding to protect the monarch?”

    If the Queen really cared about protecting the monarchy, she wouldn’t have been parading about with Andrew and she would’ve told William to knock it off.

    “Prince Harry was prepared to walk away with nothing”

    The only way Harry was going to walk away with nothing is if the Royal Family got rid of Archie and Meghan. He loses his titles? So what? He still has what he wants, which is Meghan and Archie.

  35. Coco says:

    My grandmother, who was born a couple years before Elizabeth, died at the beginning of January. We knew it was coming for a while, and while she was lucid she said she had a wonderful life and accepted what was happening. She was a very generous person and supportive of all her family members. So when I read stories about the Queen who shows more and more that she is a mean old lady, I think about a nice old lady and feel a little sad for my family’s loss, but also that the Windsor family has to put up with her and generally learned from her example.

    • Guest with Cat says:

      I’m sorry for your loss Coco. Our family lost my lovely mother-in-law a year ago yesterday. It hardly seems fair to lose such wonderful people and meanwhile that callous creature thrives.

      • Kkat says:

        My grandmother (96) who I was staying in her room with for the last year she was on hospice at home.
        Died right before H&M wedding started.
        We sat with her body for three hours while we watched the wedding and waited for the funeral home people to come get her.
        I ended up watching the wedding start to finish 5 times in a row.

        We had been excited to watch the wedding so it was very bitter sweet to watch it while she was laying there unable to.
        I was very invested in the wedding because of all the crap her family did and how we would discuss it ad nauseum.

        I don’t know where I’m going with this other than my grandmother was awesome and Petty Betty sucks 😂

      • Coco says:

        Sorry for your loss, and Khat, sorry to you as well.

    • Kkat says:

      I’m sorry for your loss as well Coco, but we’re the real winners for having wonderful grandmother’s in our lives

  36. sparker says:

    Hundreds of years of colonialization and why would anyone expect anything more from the Queen or her family? Stupid is as stupid does.

  37. Valiantly Varnished says:

    Im sure Harry took his family throwing his wife to the wolves pretty personally too.

    • Where'sMyTiara says:

      THIS. And not intervening when his son was called a chimp by the press.
      And then turn around bending over backwards to protect Prince Pedo.

      Charles and his mummy are in for a shock: Meghan’s not the only one built of Tungsten. Harry is too. He’s a war veteran, both of the battlefields of Afghanistan and the battlefields of the BRF & the RR.

      • HK9 says:

        Harry’s family repeatedly forgets two things:

        1)His mother was Diana. She had her faults (as we all do) but she was strong AF. She didn’t come to play and neither does he. He learned the lessons from her life.
        2)I think Harry’s time in the military grew him up emotionally and he was able to see some things very very clearly.

        Harry, unlike his family is a real, adult, who is not emotionally stunted and will call ‘a thing a thing’ if you will. They are trying to blame his wife, but this is him and they can’t handle it.

  38. Serinekat says:

    The longer this goes on the more the monarchy loses me. I agreed with all the observations here and am flabbergasted that anyone could see anything different. I’d still like to think that Charles and William aren’t backstabbing bitches but it’s beyond a doubt that the Queen needs to retire – she doesn’t get it, whether it’s health or just being petty as f£&k… she must go.

  39. notasugarhere says:

    The bad things come in threes royal divorce discussion? If we believe that, it could be Linley/Snowdon was #3.

    Lady Davina Windsor and Gary Lewis. Divorced in 2018 but no one knew until late 2019.

    Peter and Autumn separated for a lengthy period, divorcing in 2020.

    Linley and Serena, separated for years, divorcing in 2020.

  40. Guest says:

    Pathetic. That is exactly what old Beth is at this point. She supports andrew who has done far worse things then harry and Meghan, who hasn’t really done anything to get this level of scorn. I hope harry removes himself completely from his toxic family and him and Meghan are successful in what they do.

  41. Where'sMyTiara says:

    Knew this was gonna happen. Soon as that Medium Chill statement came out from the Sussexes, the media hobgoblins of BP were going to start ginning up “Poor Queen” and “Poor Charles” stories.

    So much BS. The BRF’s self-described misery in the face of H&M’s departure is entirely of their own making. Harry & Meghan were prepared to work, and work hard! They demonstrated success in their endeavours! They were dutiful!
    It’s the rest of the family that has their heads up their own arses.

  42. Marivic says:

    I am so afraid for the kind of reception the British public will give PHarry and Meghan upon their arrival in the UK. I wish they don’t get attacked, heckled and booed by the public. They way the British media have attacked and demonized PHarry and Meghan is something I cannot imagine possible here where I live. Utterly no respect for human dignity. They have mauled and savaged them and have reduced them to a pulp. And yet they haven’t stopped; nothing is enough until they draw blood.

    When I read British papers and social media I know how influential they are in brainwashing their readers to believe what they preach about Megan. No wonder PHarry has called them “powerful forces.” But what saddens me the most is that his brother PWillian was the instigator of all this vile.

  43. Le4Frimaire says:

    In all this moaning by the Brits, not once have they given any sort of real analysis of how the Sussexes actually feel, not once during these past years, and certainly not during the past month. They project a lot of how they think they “ are”, throwing out words like fragile, manipulative, or tantrums. Not once have they asked what it must be to do your job while being constantly told what your doing is all wrong and that you should shut up and leave if you don’t like it, because the taxpayers own you. They weren’t elected to this or campaigned for the kid, nor are they the main, or even secondary players in the institution. Harry is the 6th in line and punching way above his weight, and he and Meghan were a real benefit to the monarchy. The worst part was the complete disrespect shown to them publicly, not even paying lip service to their rank and status. Yet we are expected to respect everyone else in the monarchy and treat them with deference and kid gloves? All this talk about the Queen’s feelings, William’s incandescent rage, Kate missing Harry, etc etc. Do they actually believe the constant onslaught was acceptable? This couple were the most requested for overseas tours, they brought the highest amount of visibility to the a royal family in the past few years, yet they were resented and abused for it, and expected to be grateful for it as well. The family wanted them to stay and the tabloids did, however they weren’t willing to do a single thing to make it bearable for them, because they were afraid of them doing more and being more popular.

    • We need to understand it from House Petty, House Ostrich, and House Keen perspective: They were too busy getting those press releases out denying ‘Monarchy threatening’ tales about things like Kate’s hair extensions. Made it hard to focus on racism, bullying, and other silliness about Meghan.

  44. GuestOne says:

    The press are bringing up made up security costs& idea they disrespected the Queen& other family members in order to bring a hostile reaction on their return.

    I hope ordinary people don’t fall for it

    • S808 says:

      Security shouldn’t even be up for discussion. Aren’t those details (like cost) classified? I also read that the Queen does not decide anything security wise. My stance is, if no one wants to pay for security, abolish the monarchy or stop harassing this couple so much that there’s a huge need for it cause while they both still have 10 toes on this earth and apart of the royal family, they’re going to get protection.

      • bluemoonhorse says:

        Can you imagine if they stopped paying for security and the worst happened? The BM would be toast. No way would it survive another Diana-like-death. That is why IMO security will always be provided. The backlash would destroy the royal family.

  45. Marigold says:

    She didn’t take it personally when the media called her new granddaughter-in-law “Me-gain.” She didn’t take it personally when they compared her brand new great-grandson to a monkey. In a cartoon. She didn’t take it personally when they characterized her grandson as an inept, totally whipped, and completely incapable man being led around by the nose. She didn’t take it personally when they used racial shade like “nutmeg” to name Meghan in the press. Yes, I don’t care that it’s British slang; it’s racist aF.

    So…I don’t really care what she takes personally now.

    The hypocrisy and the cold, loveless stench of hereditary monarchy is a blight on humanity, and it always has been.

    • Lizzie says:

      +1,000 Thank you Marigold!
      Also, she didn’t take it personally when they outright said her grandson was unstable/addict/depressed/perhaps escaped from rehab.

  46. February Pisces says:

    Katie Nicholl wrote this so it’s bound to be more smearing from cambridge PR ltd. If the queen cared so much why didn’t she help harry? Why didn’t she sack any courtiers who were leaking trash about them to the press? She knew for months before it was leaked/announced that they were leaving and took no action to get them to stay. She never publically supported them, but managed to sit in the car with Andrew on the way to church. So she can really fuck off, she had every opportunity to turn it around and didn’t.

  47. Lizzie says:

    Never complain, never explain is just fancy way of saying she is a big do nothing.

    Her grandfather denied asylum to the Czar and family prior to their slaughter, her father exiled his own brother because he abdicated and she wouldn’t let her sister marry the love of her life because he was divorced (and then approved divorce for 3/4 th’s of her children) . Think how different history would be if these were not the worlds most selfish people.
    The crown’s only concern is the crown.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Letters in the archive disprove your theory about Margaret. The Queen arranged it so Margaret could marry Townsend, keep her royal housing, royal engagements, and royal funding. She would be required to remove herself and her children from the line of succession in exchange. They could be considered illegitimate by the Church, so removing them from the line of succession eliminated a competing line.

      Margaret chose not to marry Townsend.

      • Digital Unicorn says:

        People don’t want to believe the truth, I think the reality of Margaret and Townsend was that she grew bored of him and once he became available she suddenly didn’t want him anymore. Elizabeth wanted her sister to be happy and was prepared to make it happen for her.

    • Coco says:

      Yes, it made George VI’s rule easier to not have his abdicated brother around, but the main reason the Duke and Duchess of Windsor were sent to the Bahamas was that their sympathies to the Nazis made them a huge national security risk during wartime.

  48. Pierre Lecouteur says:

    The old bat does not want to talk about it because she knows she is wrong and the old bat let Willy the cheating snake and his so called wife Waity throw Harry and his wife under the bus . I can not wait until Canada gets rid

  49. lanne says:

    If I were Kate I would be horrified watching all of this go down. I’d be looking at my 2 youngest babies and be shaking with terror at what the future held for them. This family does.not.change. And with the addition of social media, the scrutiny and invasion of the public is worse than it’s ever been before. I wonder if the “Kate’s not sleeping” stories aren’t about her missing Harry (which doesn’t make sense unless there’s something prurient involved), but her thinking what’s ahead for her 2 “spares?” How does one even think, as a mother, “this kid’s important and these 2 are just the “spares.”

    Is Kate coloring in her coloring books, making chutney, and smiling beatifically because she’s the English Rose of the land and she “won?” Does she think “it’ll be DIFFERENT for Charlotte and Louis because we’ll NEVER let them pair bond with a brown person!” Or is she just continuing to be silent and “going along,” thoughtlessly, because at least her position is secure? Or is she doing what I would like to think many women would do: “Shit, what does all this mean for my kids? How can I protect them, even if that means protecting them against their own damn father? What capital do I have to protect them, and how can I gain more? What kind of insurance policies do I need to ensure my and their survival?” The Royal Family are not to be trusted. Period.

    • HK9 says:

      Unfortunately, she’s not smart enough to be horrified. She still thinks she’s special. That her position will protect her and all she has to look at is Diana to know what that means to the RF. She put all her cunning into getting Wills to marry her. She doesn’t know the principle of if someone does something in one place, they do it everywhere, which means, this treatment is heading straight for her and her children.

      The problem with Carole “helping” her daughter all this time, is Kate has never developed the skills to maneuver for herself, which she’ll need in short order because when things get tough, Charles will throw her to the wolves just like he did Megan, and Will will walk away.

    • S808 says:

      I know she’s been around for almost 20 years now but I wonder if she’s looking around and realizing she’s in over her head and if that’s where the stress is coming from. She worked so hard for the crown (and William by association) and she’s realizing she’s gonna have to keep working for it. Don’t even get me started on the children. Heaven help Charlotte and Louis.

    • bluemoonhorse says:

      I agree – she isn’t smart enough to think this through. These type of women think it will never happen to them or theirs, until oops it does. Charlotte is already being set up for the fall if you read how the trash media describes her.

    • Beach Dreams says:

      I think Kate’s likely going along to get along. Do people think that she’s truly aware of the implications that the Sussexes’ treatment have for Charlotte and Louis down the road? Personally I doubt it. She probably thinks they’ll all be just fine because as HK9 said, she’s thinks she’s special. As long as she’s married to William (with future queen consort position in sight), she probably feels like that’s enough to protect the younger ones until they’re old enough to fend for themselves. There’s been stories about Kate fancying herself as being more clever than she actually is. Consider how her apparent attempt to “phase out” Rose worked out for her and yeah…she doesn’t come across as being super thoughtful and aware.

  50. Dani says:

    I know Charles and Diana hated each other and what not, but as a PARENT (forget future King), how do you sit by and allow someone to treat your son like this, just like they did to Diana? How do you aid it? It’s pathetic and despicable and says a lot about Charles and solidifies the fact that he really is a POS who just wants the crown. Harry and Meg should be relieved they can’t use Sussex Royal anymore – why would you want to be associated with such trash anyway?

    • Becks1 says:

      This circles back to something AmyToo and I were discussing yesterday – this makes the british royal family look bad. Someone said above that Charles looks weak, and I think that’s at BEST – at best he looks weak, at worst he looks vindictive, petty and cruel.

      There could have been the exact same outcome to Sussexit with the entire family looking a lot better. As we like to say – season 20 of the crown is going to be wild!

  51. aquarius64 says:

    If Bad Dad is a stooge for KP he’s gone rogue now. He’s going to TMZ yelling Harry and Meghan disrespting the queen. He trashed the BRF last year. And I noticed the American press is taking his calls (TMZ) . the British press isn’t touching him now. I guess when you challenge Harry to a duel on TV it sounds too much like a death threat and harm to a blood prince is something even the BM would not be able to come back from.

    • I love how TMZ quoted Markle as saying he is going to CONTINUE getting paid. He has always taken pains to say he received no money. Such a liar.

    • MsIam says:

      TMZ/Harvey Levin is a friend of Trump. I think that is why he is getting his digs in at Meghan. And honestly, if Bad Dad’s complaint is H&M are disrespecting the queen, how is that going to fly in America? Bad Dad was going around saying the queen owes him, how is that showing her respect?

  52. Jumpingthesnark says:

    If she “doesn’t want to talk about it”, then why this incessant leaking to the RR??? Of course she wants to talk about it, she wants to do nothing but talk about it, so that she can avoid the thing that she REALLY doesn’t wAnt to talk about — the pedo Andy scandal.

  53. Thea says:

    Decisive actions? Brenda has always been a ostrich.

  54. Universe says:

    William fathered roses last child. Oh heck he is the father to all of them. Now that would be juicy.

    The man that claimed he was Camilla and Charles lovechild proved to be actually true. 🤣

    Ok I know it’s far fetched 😀

    • Tessa says:

      Janet Jenkins Charles ex mistress ( when Charles cheated on his so -called Great Love Camilla) has not been in the news in ages. She said her son Jason “may” be Charles’.

    • Sofia says:

      No I don’t think any of Rose’s kids are William’s. From the pictures I’ve seen they don’t favour William at all and we all know those Windsor genes are strong. Plus they all seem to favour David to me

  55. Iamcait says:

    Hey what happened to Kerwood? I thought she would be all over this one…🤔

  56. starryfish29 says:

    Boo f*cking hoo. You know what else was deeply personal? The abuse that Harry & Meghan endured before deciding to make a break from this demented institution that she calls a family.

  57. Itteh Bitteh says:

    So what I heard was “blah blah, Henry and Meg leaving damages the Monarchy, but the pedophilia does not. Nor does it count when my favorite son’s dodgy ex wife uses the monarchy to make a quick buck, but Henry and Meg can’t even be seen as using anything remotely related to as a means of increasing their status or income…blah blah blah.”

  58. Mesha says:

    I think that this episode typifies the queen, as a person. All she had to when Diana and Charles were being abused by the press is to say, “I love my son and his wife, and they are good people who do not deserve the constant press attacks. I will always love and support them, as my family means so much to me. Please respect their privacy.” She could have released a similar statement about Harry and Megan. At least, the press WOULD KNOW where she stands, even if they didn’t stop printing lies. Since she’s never defended her own, the press has gone on to speculate on the queen’s wishes, etc. If she can’t stand up for her own family, then what good is she for the country? Her silence is not being stoic or strong. It’s NOT favoring the monarchy or duty over family. It’s just cowardice and avoidance, in my opinion. Of course, the rest of the family follow her lead. And, we have the dysfunction junction. Just sad….

  59. aquarius64 says:

    I think the Thing is several Things:

    Besides KP propping up and pimping out Bad Dad to hurt Meghan in the press, Meghan may have discovered some financial shenanigans with the foundation. Slick Willie may have been skimming proceeds from Sussex projects and funneling it to Carole to bail out Party Pieces. There have been stories that the Middleton family business is in trouble. I’m not sure what UK law is on this but it sounds like a crime. Kate would not want to see her mom in the dock. Charles wouldn’t mind if the Middletons go down but the tie by marriage would hurt the Crown in such a scandal. William FFK does not have immunity from criminal prosecution.

    Tin foil hat theory for the Big Thing: William doesn’t have a love child ; William IS a love child. A lot of articles were out about Diana’s virginity. Being 19 was no guarantee she was a virgin and Charles may not have been the reason. I can see the BRF paying off the guy to keep quiet. But Diana knew about Camilla before the wedding; and after the I do’s Charles pines for Camilla and Diana hooks up with sidepiece to make Charles jealous. But unexpected result: William. When Hewitt was outed as the official paramour stories were out that the BRF was ordering paternity for Harry AND William. Why run them when Hewitt was the guy when Harry was two, unless there was suspicion Diana had more than one name on her dance card prior? William confirmed the suspicion. Such a reveal would be huge because it impacts the succession. William would be ineligible for the throne and so would George Charlotte and Louis. Harry would be pushed up four spots to be the heir to the heir and Meghan is a future Princess of Wales and future queen. Archie, a child of African American heritage would be a future king. Not only racistbuwoukd throw a fit but republicans would have ammo to end the monarchy: four people who are not descendants of George V are passing as lawful heirs getting the wealth and perks. It would be the fraud case of the century where Parliament would step in and remove William and sadly his kids from the succession.

    • Feeshalori says:

      William has very strong Windsor genes and looks too much like his Uncle Edward to be Diana’s love child.

  60. JennEricaMS says:

    Purely hypothetical question but how hard would it be to abolish the monarchy? I’m an American who is fairly ignorant to the intricacies of what constitutes assets of the government versus what the personal wealth and real estate holdings of the RF are. Buckingham Palace, for example, does that belong to the government or the RF? What about the various other estates and items like the crown jewels? I have no doubt the monarchy will survive Charles but after that I’m not certain, especially when the younger generation comes into the majority.

  61. blunt talker says:

    My theory about the thing that is being kept quiet-The royal family did not think this wedding would happen-by the time they realized it was going to happen-they tried to put roadblocks after the marriage-I really believe they were working with Thomas Markle. Piers Morgan. and others in the media to destroy the Sussex marriage-I think Harry found out-Then the separating from Will and Kate’s foundation-Moving to Frogmore Cottage-After their successful tour In Australia and the announcement of Meghan having a baby-Everything went down hill starting in the fall of 2018 with the help of those dark forces Harry was talking about. The royal family really did not want a biracial woman or her child in the line of succession. All the negative stories during her pregnancy. Harry and Meghan followed the money and found out who was doing what. Thomas keep saying the royal family owes him-whatever does he mean and why does he feel this way. Piers harping and smearing Meghan mostly since the wedding-People all these things are connected-there is no way I believe they are not connected back to the royal family.

    • Scollins says:

      I’d add the press who have much to lose in Meghan’s lawsuit, $$ and credibility. One publication has already reportedly lost tons of $$ towards the lawsuit and circulation is down. And the RF may turn out to be leaks themselves which will cause a loss of their credibility.

    • aquarius64 says:

      Bad Dad is a loose cannon now and a big liability to the BRF. Notice the BM has not reported on him lately. I think the Fail is setting him up to take the fall and will expose him in the lawsuit or before that. The press will claim Markle bamboozled them with his stories and they will scorch earth him because he exposed the media to the lawsuits.

  62. Jojo says:

    If being part of the royal family is so terrible, Harry should just abdicate and dump his Duke of Sussex title.

    • Olenna says:

      He can’t abdicate because he’s not on the throne and he’s not ‘abdicating’ any royal responsibilities because he is not required to do any. And, being a duke doesn’t require him to do any either. So, what is your issue with him, really? That he has a title or that his wife has a title? It’s certainly not because him having a title or transitioning his life to private has any impact on your life.

  63. Marivic says:

    Nobody has the right to tell someone what to do. Not your life. Live and let live .

  64. MeghanNotMarkle says:

    If she doesn’t want to talk about it then stop feeding the press.

  65. MJM says:

    All of this endless speculation, commentary and opining about Sussexit is getting very tiresome (not Kaiser but dumb people like KN and SBS).

    We all know why this is happening. It happened before with Diana. Harry and Meghan’s stars were rising too fast and eclipsing future and future future. No one but the heirs are allowed to shine very bright period. If Harry and Meghan were like Edward and Sophie who attract no attention Sussexit wouldn’t have happened. All these narratives are being pushed, some trying to suggest otherwise, but Harry and Meghan were driven out for being too popular.