DM: Duchess Meghan told friends she’ll ‘rise above the jealousy & pettiness’


The Daily Mail keeps getting “exclusives” with the Duchess of Sussex’s “friends.” The last DM exclusive with an unnamed Friend of Meghan (FOM?) was last Friday, just hours before the Sussexes released their clarifying statement on how they wouldn’t use “royal” as part of their branding. That Friday exclusive on the DM was about how Meghan told friends that she was peeved by the Queen’s pettiness (I’m paraphrasing) and that there really wasn’t any way for the Queen to stop them from using “royal” anyway. Which was sort of part of the Sussexes’ statement – they would no longer use Sussex Royal, but THEY COULD. So, take that as you will. I don’t honestly believe that the DM has sources deep within Meghan’s camp. I think people at the DM are merely making educated guesses and spinning those guesses negatively. So, what’s new? This exclusive which dropped on Wednesday:

Meghan Markle believes she and Prince Harry are being ‘picked on’ and the restrictions being placed on them are ‘payback’ for wanting to be independent, she told her close friends, can exclusively reveal. Meghan grumbled to her inner circle last week over the Queen banning the couple from using the word ‘royal’ in their ‘branding’, later issuing an extraordinary statement appearing to complain the palace was treating them differently to other family members.

‘Meghan said that [she and Harry] were left with no choice but to make a public statement,’ a friend explained. ‘She said if anyone should feel insulted, it should be them. They never intended to capitalize on the word royal, and to insinuate they were somehow abusing their privileges is absurd.’

Harry is now in Edinburgh for his last round of engagements as a working royal but Meghan will not be joining him there, instead meeting up with him in London. The insider said she has no qualms about being in the UK. The friend added: ‘Meghan is going straight to London, not Edinburgh because that’s Harry’s thing. She said she and Harry will continue to rise above jealousy and pettiness and focus on the good they are creating and on being the best parents to Archie. She said she will continue to champion Harry because out of everyone, he has the most integrity and the most loyalty.’

Meghan also believes the Queen was ‘under pressure to make those demands about the name change’, because Harry is the Queen’s ‘favorite and others just can’t deal with it.’

The friend added to ‘She said the reason they created their website in the first place was to be as transparent as possible. What was written was carefully worded and was in no way a jab at the Queen. ‘

[From The Daily Mail]

I mean… the idea that the Queen is going out of her way to be petty *because* the Queen likes Harry so much? That doesn’t hold up as a theory. I think the Queen was very fond of Harry, but not fond enough to actually protect him, his wife and his child when push came to shove. As for the idea that Meghan wasn’t taking a “jab” at the Queen with the statement… she was and it’s fine. The jab was completely justified, because all of the smears and attacks and, yes, the jealousy and pettiness. That whole “jealousy and pettiness” section sounds like a subtweet of the Cambridges. But what do I know. *nail polish emoji*

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle visit Nottingham Academy

Photos courtesy of WENN and Avalon Red.

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

118 Responses to “DM: Duchess Meghan told friends she’ll ‘rise above the jealousy & pettiness’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Cidy says:

    And she will rise above it. H&M will be fine. The pettiness, jealousy and sour attitudes from The Firm are not going to stop their success.

    I think the Queen probably is fond of Harry, but I think she has a hands off attitude toward the tabloid culture in the UK and leaves it up to each person to “take care of their own” and ignores the infighting. But in this instance she should have spoken up against racism and instead she kept her lips closed and left Harry and Meg to the dogs.

  2. Chica71 says:

    They’re making s**t up now. Clicks are down and no leaks

    • Guest2.0 says:

      Agree. This is just more Daily Fail fan fiction. They have no true sources or friends of the Sussexes telling them squat.

      • Lucy De Blois says:

        Agree 100%. DM can’t let go the enormous quantity of clicks generated by H&M; they got used to it and W&K and all the rest isn’t enough anymore.

        Like you said: no more household based in UK, no more courtiers and staff from BP/KP/Clarence House sniffing around their agenda, they created some fictional friends leaking all over what they said, they thought and they are going to do.

        All the tactics are just… too much for the stomach.

      • Maggie says:

        Of course. Meg and H decided they didn’t want to work for the RF so they should just leave- no titles or money. They don’t need to take RF money, they will be fine after a clean break and they can start living a “normal” life like they wanted.

    • kellebelle says:

      Exactly. None of Meghan’s friends talk to this shameless rag anyway. They fabricate all their stories. They’re only trying to make as much bank as possible before the lawsuit goes through … and it IS going through.

    • RoyalBlue says:

      Exactly because her friends are discreet. She didn’t tell them that and they didn’t go running to the Fail. They are stirring the pot to make her stay as uncomfortable as possible when she flies back to the island.

      • Zazu says:

        They either made it out of whole cloth and blatantly lied, or they found someone who met Meghan twice and called them her bff, and wrote down their wild speculations. Remember the “friend” who talked to the Fail about how she warned Meghan about the British tabloids before her engagement? The one who hadn’t spoken to Meghan in a couple of years? I bet someone like her is the “FOM source” and is saying some stuff she thinks Meghan might say

      • L4frimaire says:

        They’re also assuming she talks blithely about the day to day drama of this. This whole experience has probably been something that no one outside of it can imagine, and quite traumatic, so there are certain things she won’t discuss anytime soon, or simply too difficult to talk about. No one thinks about the emotions involved. She isn’t allowed anger or hurt, to her detractors those are feeling she’s not allowed to have.

    • I totally agree Chica71. This continuing ‘friend of Meghan’ source giving stuff to the DM is just more of the lies they vomit out. Reading the above, there is nothing said in there that I didn’t know; so I could just as easily be deemed a self-styled FOM and write it myself. With her lawsuit pending, there is no way I believe a real FOM is talking to any of these tabloids. The DM is using info that is already out there or can be enlarged on from public knowledge (e.g., Harry arrived back alone and is only in Scotland briefly for Travylist; so as a self-styled FOM, I could guess that when Meghan arrives she will fly into London as Harry will no longer be in Scotland.). This stuff isn’t rocket science. I remember all the DM articles quoting inside sources about the exact buildout of Frogmore — lies which are now line items in the official Court documents filed in Meghan’s lawsuit (see I hope Meghan’s legal team is adding all this to the Fuel of her lawsuit. Finally, why is it always Meghan’s friends? Why is the statement always Meghan’s petty jab? Or Meghan’s disrespect? Once again, the DM slant is the angry black woman controlling the pathetic wimp of a white prince.

      “Same old racist, mysogonistic bullshit, different day” should be the banner for the DM.

  3. Alexandria says:

    I think DM is reading Celebitchy comments yes? We are Meghan’s friends hahahahah

    • Snazzy says:

      It sounds like that, doesn’t it? lolol

    • Amy Too says:

      It could really be “friends of Meghan” in the same way that the people who donate to the symphony in my town are called “friends of the (My City) Symphony,” or the people who work to have the historic house that Jane Austen (for example) once lived in preserved are “the Friends of Jane Austen Society.” So yeah, people who are fans of the thing/person and are invested in making sure the thing/person thrives and/or doesn’t come to harm, but aren’t actually in any way a personal or intimate friend to the thing/person.

    • L4frimaire says:

      Totally agree. This site and Twitter are their sources. They’re definitely lifting quotes from Sussex stans and defenders.

  4. aquarius64 says:

    Unless the Fail is bugging the Sussexes’ home they don’t know squat. Created for drama and clicks. And possibly ginned up to downplay more serious royal news: George and Charlotte’s school may be exposed to the coronavirus.

    • TheOtherSarah says:

      “Unless the Fail is bugging the Sussexes’ home they don’t know squat”
      I wouldn’t put that past them.

      • Becks1 says:

        Yeah don’t give them any ideas……

      • Izzy says:

        Let’s face it, from what we know of the British rags, they could be illegally accessing text messages, etc. to get these “inside scoops”

      • Jaded says:

        @Izzy – with what Harry and Meghan have been through I imagine they’re using burner phones that can’t be hacked into (i.e. Katie Holmes when she dumped Tom Cruise). Harry’s been hacked in the past and is probably taking every measure to prevent it from happening again, including regular sweeps of their temporary home to ensure a “bugless” environment.

    • Tina says:

      What i thought was interesting was the story they came out about a Friend saying they won’t use Sussex Royal but could technically abroad…and then the website came out with the text that confirmed that. They’re in Canada now so it can’t be the courtiers leaking this. I wonder if the DM did manage to find a source…perhaps their website vendor?

      • Hi Tina — A lawyer — hell, a law clerk — working in that particular field of law could have briefed them on the use of the word. Perhaps the DM is reading Celebitchy, as several “lawyer” celebitchies already shared that nugget over the last few weeks in other posts on here. Again, the DM is just taking public domain info and stirring the pot.

      • Babsorig says:

        @Tina, All that had been ALREADY widely discussed on social media and on this very site you are posting on. Just click on Sussexes can’t use sussex royal branding anymore?
        This thread was Feb 19 and all commentary is littered with “the queen doesn’t have jurisdiction in NA or elsewhere in Europe, so if the Sussexes want they can use “royal”. Not only on this website, juts go to twitter, it was everywhere before the Fail came up with that article. It doesn’t take rocket science to figure this out, its all there if you are interested in facts (which looks like to me you aren’t). So, NO, there are no leaks coming from the Sussex camp, LOL.

      • Sunday says:

        @Tina they’re in Canada now, but until March 31st I think their “official” goings on still have to run through Buckingham Palace in some capacity (their Buckingham Palace address is the address in use for Travalyst, for example). That’s how all the upcoming appearances were leaked prior to the official announcements. If this isn’t just a guess or legal research and is a leak, it is still coming from the Palace, not Canada, their friends or their web company. How would their website vendor even be privy to that kind of info? I would imagine that the company that designed the site gave them access to a CMS (content mgmt system) that someone on their team uses to load their own content; probably the same person handling their social media. No, those technicalities about use of Sussex Royal were either typical speculation or more loose lips from the palace.

      • MsIam says:

        Like others have said, it was common knowledge that they could use Sussex Royal abroad. The DM claimed that was what they planned to do. H&M refuted that on their IG, i.e. that while they did have the right to use the name abroad, they had no intentions to do so and never did since the matter was decided in January. DM was saying that Meghan was going around “last week” telling her friends they were going to use it anyway. This to me at least shows the DM have no sources. They ran that article because they were assuming H&M might use Sussex Royal anyway outside of the UK so the article would be their “see we told you first!” moment. But H&M slapped that hand by saying they had already settled that matter a month ago.

      • Nic919 says:

        Anyone who has been to law school would be aware that you cannot enforce laws outside a particular jurisdiction. It is a basic concept. (Not slagging the non lawyers but just pointing out it is covered early on). There are tons of texts on how to enforce foreign judgments, how to extradite criminals, etc, etc. Trademark law in particular is impossible to control outside of the country. You need to have the reach of a Disney to try to stop it and even then they can’t get to all countries.

  5. Belli says:

    I wonder whether they’re counting their palace sources as friends of Meghan…

  6. Imtired says:

    So does DM have a history of saying they have an exclusive (with royals?) but it’s untrue? I’m not familiar with that site enough to get a feeling one way or another. I check it now and then but only for the past year. They actually do get “exclusives” on ilhan Omar somehow, which do not turn out to be false.

    • BabsORIG says:

      Naaah celebitchers are Meghan’s friends and the Fail sources. Both stories, this and the one from last week are/were lifted from this website word for word.

    • GuestWho says:

      Consider that the DM is fighting (hard) a law suit brought by Meghan, and that they are very, very angry about it. They are, generally, an awful rag known for their blatant dishonesty and sensationalism. People may be giving them exclusives on celebrities, but there is no way that anyone connected with Meghan would give information to a tabloid that spent the last 3 years torturing her every single day for sport.

  7. Becks1 says:

    Well, first off, we know her actual friends aren’t running to the DM. Except, that the twist on this is so obviously to make Meghan look better – they were never going to abuse their privileges, they’re not taking a jab at the queen, etc. So maybe Meghan is trying to play the UK media game a bit? But I highly doubt it.

    But, at any rate, this is an article where my reaction is, “well, duh.” Of course Meghan feels that way, its how most people would feel. Of course she feels there is jealousy and pettiness, because there is. And of course she and harry are going to try to rise above it, because they will. So even with no sources whatsoever and if this whole thing is made up – it still makes sense to me.

    The part about Harry being the favorite – the way I read it was that because the Queen does like/love harry so much, she may have been more inclined to work in his favor and that ticked off Charles and/or William (well definitely William) who pushed for some of the restrictions. so I took that as a jab at those two, FWIW.

    • Belli says:

      If it had been another paper, I might agree. But I can’t believe that Meghan would allow any leaks to the Mail while she’s suing them. Especially given the nature of her lawsuit.

      The article is written as if Meghan’s throwing a tantrum too, so I’m not sure it’s meant to be positive.

      But yes, there was pettiness and jealousy and they were picked on endlessly. That part is completely right but is pretending not to be.

    • Guest2.0 says:

      “So maybe Meghan is trying to play the UK media game a bit? “

      I don’t think H&M are engaging the British Media, especially the Fail, in any way, shape or form.

      • Becks1 says:

        Which is why I then said that I highly doubt it 😉

      • zilin says:

        I can only interject and say that in fact every statement from them has been in response to things written in the Daily Mail or papers from their corporate group. All the other British media has been merly reporting on their appearances and statements. Not that the Daily Mail is in any way justified for the vile and prejudiced things they say, but why get so preoccupied with them? Just file a lawsuit and move on. Besides if we accept that nothing the DM says is true…which I fully believe, then we must accept that their entire evaluation of this, including what the Queen supposedly says and feels, is erroneous. Which leads me to believe that the entire narrative about the royal split is fictional.

  8. Seraphina says:

    I hope and wish Harry and Meghan all the best. It’s easy to say one may rise and stay above toxic people but it does take its toll. It will help being so far away from the trolls (BRF).

    The ironic part that the BRF seems to not get is that their actions of smear campaigns and leaks have made them more like celebrities and they don’t want to be “celebrities” because they believe they are royals and above the commonality of celebrity stays. They are bringing about their own demise which is hilarious.

  9. L84Tea says:

    This is completely besides the point, but seeing all these old photos of Meg makes me miss seeing her so badly. I miss seeing her chic style. I am so looking forward to her future endeavors with her charities and hope she and Harry knock it out of the park. A life well lived is the best revenge.

    • MeghanNotMarkle says:

      I selfishly miss seeing them, too. I know the next two weeks are going to be rough in re: media coverage for them but I’m excited to see them.

  10. May says:

    They are getting things disturbingly right. I don’t think it’s necessarily someone in the Sussexes’ close circle, but I do think they have a source close enough to get some quotes and fill the gaps with educated guesses

    • Guest2.0 says:

      These are, as you say, educated guesses. Any of us could have written this article. Doesn’t mean the Fail has sources connected to the Sussexes.

    • GuestWho says:

      They have NO source close to M&H who would talk to the DM. As Guest2.0 said, any one of us could have written this (but we would have done a better job).

      • rachel says:

        lol Guestwho – you are probably right. Many of the commenters on here are more savvy and are much better writers than the Fail’s so-called journalists.

        In any case, if we’ve established that they write pure fiction mixed with drivel, why do we keep using the Fail as the basis of discussions on the royals? Why isn’t the Guardian or BBC ever used? Are we contributing to the problem and giving the Fail more steam?

      • BayTampaBay says:

        “any one of us could have written this (but we would have done a better job)”

        With proper grammar, correct punctuation, spelling and use of titles & styles.!

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @Rachel – The Guardian runs very few stories on the Royals.

      • GuestWho says:

        @Rachel – The DM crap keeps our blood running hot! 🙂

        Nobody believes it, and our talking about it here doesn’t really raise the profile of the DM because we don’t click on their articles directly. The Guardian and the BBC don’t spend as much time on the royals. It’s a place filler until actual news comes out I guess, and it gets tons of clicks for CB so they keep running with them.

    • Olenna says:

      How do you know what is ‘disturbingly right’ about this so-called friend’s comments? The conviction in your comment is as suspect as this article.

      • May says:

        I am not sure what you are implying, but I merely meant that unfortunately the DM was proved right about the Royal thing and it was not the usual fanfiction drivel.

      • Olenna says:

        Again, what has been proven right about what the Duchess of Sussex actually said? What is ‘disturbingly right’? And, why are you not questioning what others have said about the Fail’s lack of credibility?

      • May says:

        In my opinion, the time line between the DM’s speculation regarding the use of Royal and the confirmation on the Sussexes’ side, for one. But I really don’t see why you are being so aggressive about it. Again, I merely stated my opinion regarding the existence of this supposed leak.

        (Apologies if this doesn’t appear in the correct order, I have a few issues replying correctly with the mobile)

      • Olenna says:

        I asked you about the validity of the so-called friend’s comments. Most of us are aware of the KP leaking, but here we are, two comments later and no answer to the original question. I see no need for a third, but carry on.

      • windyriver says:

        @May, DM almost certainly got the info that there was a discussion over the use of Royal from one of its typical sources – within the RF. So the media creatively came up with, “they’re barred from using Royal”. Omid, meanwhile, said according to his sources, a discussion was still ongoing. Probably a number of people knew about it.

        The articles were fairly recent, but other posters have said the Sussexes stopped pursuing the trademark for SussexRoyal in mid-January, so it might have been old news by the time the media got to run with it. A public present from the family to show their control as Harry and Meghan walked out the door.

        Harry and Meghan covered a lot of things when they issued their most recent statement. That they also included a reference to the use of Royal not only states the correct facts, but explains why there shouldn’t be a surprise when the actual name of their organization is announced.

        Aside from that, any friend of Meghan who’s been leaking to the DM or anyplace else won’t be a friend for long…so there’s that.

    • Babsorig says:

      @Guestwho, everything in this article has been discussed extensively on this very website by various commenters. Someone at the Fail is reading this website and writing articles based on our discussions here and attributing them to Meghan’s friends. Given that this is one of the few Meghan friendly sites out there (if not the only one) I’m guessing we are now “Meghan’s friends” We are being quoted as Meghan friends on every article they write.

      • Anonymous says:

        The Daily Fail stalks Meghan friendly pages, repurposes fans as friends, and writes fanfiction accordingly. I Rise Above The Jealously and Pettiness! is fanfiction Meghan declaring As God Is My Witness, I’ll Never Go Hungry Again!

      • Jaded says:

        I demand residuals for my writing dammit!

      • Nic919 says:

        I only wish they would quote me as Meghan’s friend😀. Send me the $$$

        But seriously, it’s obvious certain people in the media check out what is said here because it is known as a pro Meghan site. I mean there are tumblr groups dedicated to complaining about specific posters, like me, because of our opinions. Which we will continue to voice because it’s pretty awesome living rent free in the minds of certain sugars.

  11. KellyRyan says:

    I think Queenies fondness for Harry has been in the past. She was in a four generation photo with Harry excluded. She was at her desk, family photos, Harry excluded. H&M’s position in the BRF was to obey the Firm, and take a back seat on the bus.

    • BearcatLawyer says:

      That photo was of the reigning monarch, the Queen, and the kings-in-waiting. That is why Harry was left out.

      • Lady D says:

        I agree with you, but It still had to hurt Harry. I think it was the catalyst for everything that followed. Things really started to go off track after that picture came out.

      • Becks1 says:

        I think it was the idea that the picture reinforced that Harry and Meghan are unimportant. and of course, in the grand scheme of things, they are. Harry is 6th in line. As history marches on, his importance will continue to dwindle – that’s not a dig against Harry, its just a fact. Now we don’t know what will happen with the Sussexes now, and I think they are going to have a big impact, but had things kept going as they were? Its just natural that he would have become less and less important over the years AND through history.

        But RIGHT NOW (or rather, 2 months ago) there was such speculation in the media about how Harry and Meghan were outsiders in the family, the queen didn’t like Meghan, she wanted to give her advice, were they even WELCOME at the Christmas luncheon, etc. – so that picture just sort of fed into that narrative in a really negative way. I actually don’t think the Queen meant anything by it re: Harry at all. I think it was a formal portrait of monarchs (current and future) while the queen is still alive and I think it was more about sending a message of continuity and stability during Brexit.

        I likewise don’t think the photos on her piano during her Christmas speech meant what people thought – she wasn’t excluding the Sussexes, she was showcasing the past, present and future of the monarchy. BUT, using the Cambridges Christmas picture, where Kate was very prominently featured (no shade, their Christmas picture, I expect the mother to feature prominently) – it took away from the point of “this is about the monarchy.” And again, the optics were just BAD.

        I think the queen is petty and can be mean when she wants to be, but I also think she is pretty clueless. Maybe she meant to send a message to Harry with all those pictures, but I don’t think so (maybe the courtiers did?)

        but there WAS a message, and whether it was intentional or not – it was definitely received by the Sussexes. Slimmed down monarchy with no place for them.

      • Belinda says:

        @BearcatLawyer I’d totally agree with you, only the timing … at best it was not the right signal at the worst time. (I’m thinking og that Christmas message photo arrangement.)

  12. zilin says:

    Once and for all with no shade or slight intended, the Monarchy and the UK government DO have rights over “royal” and descriptions there of when in relation to the British monarchy, both in the UK and abroad. The Sussex title does not belong to anyone and the UK parliament is ultimately responsible for it’s management. Suggesting otherwise is simply wrong.

    • Nic919 says:

      Different countries have different laws and the Queen can’t stop the word royal from being used outside of the UK.

      • notasugarhere says:

        And she doesn’t stop plenty of businesses within the UK from using ‘royal’.

      • zilin says:

        I specifically said Royal in relation to the British monarchy and yes they can since the international convention that protects this right has been signed by 115 countries, one of which is the US. Then the question would be realised whether the royal actually related to the British monarchy or not which is up to a court to decide. I’m guessing they realised this and figured it’s a lot less hassle to get rid of it all together then wage a court battle.

      • notasugarhere says:

        And yet again, she doesn’t stop companies in the UK from using the word royal. Keep pretending not to understand, we can tell where you’re coming from.

      • Nic919 says:

        Please stop talking about enforcement of trademarks outside of the UK as if you have any idea of what you are talking about. The UK cannot impose its domestic legislation relating to the word royal on any country outside of the UK. The US in particular has no such restriction and a ton of things are branded royal.

    • Belinda says:

      About a year ago I ate at a Royal Café in London. I believe the Royal Opera House in London also has a restaurant with a similar name … anyone can commercially use the word “royal”!

      • Belinda says:

        And wasn’t there some business owner who had that instagram account “Sussex Royal” before it got taken away and given to Harry and Meghan? Before that he didn’t seem to have any problems …

      • Nic919 says:

        But they signed a convention!! It’s the law guys!

  13. Loretta says:

    Do are we suppost believe that Meghan’s friends are talking with DM, the same tabloid that is being sued by her? Sure, Jen.

  14. babco says:

    Someone in one of her friends’ entourage probably spilled the beans for money, a PA, an intern, a nanny, a secretary. These rich people, they often forget staff are humans too.

    • Sunday says:

      Absolutely not. Suppose there was a distant connection somewhere who somehow had access to info to “spill the beans” (which I highly doubt, the only leaks are coming from the palace and the RF itself) – this is the best they’ve got? Information that’s easily verifiable by checking any thread related to to the royals or googling trademark law? No way, this is just more speculation and innuendo, woven together by the most basic, obvious truths.

      • Jaded says:

        I’ve no doubt there’s a legion of worker bees at the Fail and Sun who regularly scour sites like Celebitchy for relevant comments they can grab. Nothing is leaking from Camp Sussex now that they’re in Canada.

  15. Val says:

    Rise she will! That’s we do, we persevere and we rise!

  16. Cosmo says:

    I’m not sure what the end game is for these tabloids. Do they want everyone to hate this woman? Do they know what damage these stories do? The hate that they have created should make Harry and Meghan a little fearful of going back to the UK.

    • Tessa says:

      The hate filled comments follow these stories. Some are twisted but the DM lets them in.

    • GuestWho says:

      Yes, they want everyone to hate this woman. They want this woman to drop her lawsuit. They want the headlines when they finally get someone injured.

    • Emmitt says:

      The end game is to drive Meghan and Archie away permanently from the BRF.

      The end game is to get Harry to dump Meghan before they have a second child.

      This Daily Wail story is fake news. If anyone is being petty with website and social media statements, it’s HARRY not Meghan. HARRY is the one who has consistently issued statements to and about the press, not Meghan. Why does everyone assume Meghan is the mastermind behind all of this?

    • Erinn says:

      Guys. Money. At the end of the day, it’s mostly about money. They KNOW that they’ll get clicks from both the Meghan haters and her defenders. It’s a win win for them.

  17. Harla says:

    On a completely shallow note…I love that Strathberry purse Meghan is using in these photos!! I’ve loved it from the first time I saw it and still love it!! Just wish is wasn’t so expensive 🙁

    • Chrissy says:

      I love that handbag too. Beautiful and would work in many situations. Love the coat as well. Meagan has great style.

  18. Le4Frimaire says:

    Looking at some of these quotes, it’s obvious the Mail is getting this off Twitter. These “ friends “ being used as sources are just Meghan fans talking back and forth. Too much if these quotes sound like stuff I’ve read in the Twitter sphere. No way would people in actual contact with Meghan talk to the paper she’s suing.

    • Totally agree with you Le4Fremaire —- people like us are probably the ‘FOM’ source material used by the tabloids. The win/win for the tabloids is they are obviously not paying any of us FOMs for our chatter on public chat platforms. One tabloid here in the US (I think it was the National Enquirer) said in their response to a defamation lawsuit they lost several years ago that they weren’t writing and publishing lies as everyone who read them should realize it was all fiction. That they considered themselves an entertainment source with fan fiction stories. 😱 I mean their logic is so twisted that if you think about it too hard your head will explode. 🤯 There is no journalistic integrity to the tabloids. Their whole subculture is fictitious lies wrapped around tiny kernels of truth.

    • Anonymous says:

      Ding. Ding. Ding. We have a winner.

  19. Sundae says:

    Jesus the dissonance is here is comical 😂

  20. GuestOne says:

    Dan Wooten from the Sun had a radio debate where he called Liz Cundy who met Meghan once when presenting at a charity gala& has been dining on that encounter since, as Meghan’s ex BFF. This ‘friend’ could easily be a journalist turning to her ‘friend’ that she met just once, Piers Morgan for his take on things That’s the level of credibility of these stories to me based on previous reporting.

    Also check out this piece avoid the Daily Mail smearing a local single mother& entrepreneur. They are perfectly capable of complete fabrications The journalist involved has written a number of hit pieces on Meghan and got a job at the Times for her trouble.

  21. Andrew’s Nemesis says:

    Can this latest piece of fiction be added to the lawsuit?

  22. Bettyrose says:

    My one college journalism course taught me you can protect sources but not invent quotes? In the U.S. true but our legal systems are pretty similar, yes? How is the DM able to put comments they can’t substantiate in quotes?

    • MsIam says:

      I’m guessing it’s because they don’t attribute the quotes to any one person. It’s just to anonymous “sources” . Plus, they will fall back on the “it’s not journalism but entertainment” argument and they are just quoting from the “general consensus”.

    • Amy Too says:

      A lot of the times they’ll actually just have one or two words inside the quotes, and then they put the rest of what was supposedly said outside the quotes. I’m sure Meghan has at some point said the 2-3 words that they actually quote her as saying in some articles.

      But everything in quote marks in this article is actually from the “friend of Meghan.” The FOM is summarizing and giving her version of what Meghan told her, and the friend isn’t actually quoting Meghan at all. There are no quotes inside her quotes to suggest that she’s telling us what Meghan said verbatim. She’s summarizing and interpreting what Meghan supposedly told her.

      And even then, the mail is still summarizing what the friend said in some cases. Check out the first paragraph. The only words they’re actually quoting from the friend are “picked on” “payback” “royal” and “branding,” and even then, “royal” could be the Mail wanting to isolate that word and not actually a quote from anyone, and “branding” could be sarcastic scare quotes. The “friend” may have used those words at some point in their conversation with the mail, and the mail has cherry picked those words from her and filled in the rest of the sentences.

  23. NewKay says:

    Black women always do. There’s literally a poem called And Still I Rise.

  24. Bella Mama says:

    I think the queen is very much out of touch with social media and the impact that it has. I have several relatives around the age of 90 fool, while they understand it exist, they don’t truly understand how far-reaching its impact is and how immediate it is felt.

    She completely misread the whole Diana’s death and I believe now she is Miss reading the impact of social media.

    She has a history of sticking her head in the sand when it comes to dealing with big issues

    • Elle says:

      (First time commenter) These “Meghan said xyz” articles are actually quite pro-Sussex when boiled down, as someone said earlier.

      I do think they’re coming from the Sussex team, not from a “friend” but via someone like Omid Scobie, who is provided with very specific information and asked to get it out there. Then the DM is coloring it with their own negative spin where they can (“Meghan grumbled…”).

      Things like saying Harry is the only one with integrity, the Queen likes him best, H&M would never abuse their position, etc are way too flattering of House Sussex for the DM to make them up out of whole cloth.

      • MsIam says:

        DM put those type of statements in to cover their @sses now that there is a lawsuit. If the Sussexes want to get info out via Omid, then he will tweet it or it will be in Hapers Bazaar (I think that is where his articles are published, right?). Not sideways through the Daily Mail that they are suing.

      • Elle says:

        House Sussex (Meghan, really) is shrewd and savvy, and is going to use as many channels as they can to get their side out there and they know the DM is widely read, whether they like it or not. They also know the DM isn’t *really* on anyone’s side; it just wants clicks and will run any story that is going to generate those. It just happens that the Palace, Charles, and William were the only ones willing to give them direct “information” before.

        Omid can directly tweet things and publish in VF, but he can also be the anonymous FOM in the DM. He has strong relationships with the Emilys, both of whom write for the DM frequently.

      • GuestWho says:

        It’s not coming from the Sussex team.

      • MsIam says:

        @Elle, Omid may be friends with those harpies but he still has his own byline to protect. Why would he provide any information to them when he can get it out there himself? And if the Sussexes wanted their story out in the DM they could provide it themselves which they won’t. Anything that is published in the DM is going to be negative or a back handed compliment at best. Plus, if Omid is sharing info with the DM and the Sussexes found out, he would be shut out completely.

      • GuestWho says:

        @Elle – look at it this way too…
        They are taking the DM to court for the copyright on the letter to her troll father, but, in addition to that, part of their case is about how the DM has been untruthful and maligned Meghan’s character. M wants to show that that letter is NOT in the public interest (which is the DM’s main thrust).

        There is no way they would put themselves in the position of the DM being able to say – look, see, they use their own sources to get us information.

      • MeghanNotMarkle says:

        They’re not going to provide scoops to a publication that they’re actively suing.

  25. AMM says:

    Does anyone else suspect their might be a slight tone shift in recent reports of the Sussexs? Theres been more stories that, while still showing shade, paint the Sussexs in a more positive light. Its only been the past couple of days but I feel like the recent reports on Harry and Meghan have been slightly more positive. They posted the interview with the Labour lady talking positively about Harry. They had this article that reads like half way between Meghan throwing a fit and halfway like shes correct. They have two articles up about Beckham and Dame Helen praising them, with only minimal snark thrown in from the writer. VF had a couple of articles that are positive about Harry and there was even one yesterday semi accusing the Cambridges of “cheating” at instagram.

    I dont know what it means or why, but my tin foil hat is buzzing and I have a feeling the theres gonna be something happening with the other royals. Maybe they know something we dont and are trying to pick the “right side”.

    • L4frimaire says:

      Maybe they just want access to the real news makers and smearing them will result in slammed doors in their faces. Come the 31st, Meghan and Harry are no longer bound to the Rota and everyone wants a piece of their story, which is still evolving. I’m not following it much, but VF is part of Condé Nast and they know they will be scooped by Vogue once Meghan can talk to magazines and create content. Also, the Royals will be a snooze fest without the Sussexes. Are they going to keep regurgitating Duchess Difficult and never putting a foot wrong stories when the rest of the world has moved on?

      • AMM says:

        That’s sort of what I was thinking. The reality of them leaving the RR for good is sinking in, and they realize that they will need access. Their perfect Kate stories have dismal comment numbers. Same with the recent Pro Charles stories. And no one seems to really like William, period. Posting anything about negative or positive about Meghan will get a slew of nasty racist comments, so may as well post positive stuff to bring in the fans as well.

        But if they do shift towards positive coverage, they will need a new victim. I’m not positive as to who that will be.

      • MsIam says:

        @AMM maybe Beatrice’s new husband? Or Bea’s husband’s ex-girlfriend. I think they would salivate over the mom vs. stepmom stories. Other than that, who do they have unless they are going to turn on W&K or start bashing Andrew.

  26. Courtney B says:

    I regards for lawsuits, the tabs should look back at Harry’s family history. While it’s not an exact situation, he’s taking a play out of his great great grandfather’s playbook. For all those who says the royals shouldn’t respond or there’s not precedent or the dreaded word ‘protocol’, take a look at 1911 when George V sued Edward Mylius for libel. The story had been going around since his marriage in 1893 that he’d already secreted married the daughter of a British admiral while a naval officer at Malta. He then threw her over when his elder brother died and he needed to make a dynastic marriage. The story was utter rubbish and George and his fiancé even joked about it. But it lingered and would pop up from time to time. There was an especial flare up when he became king in 1910 and he’d had enough. He happened to be the rare monarch who was actually faithful to his wife and was enraged primarily at the idea that he was a bigamist but also disparaging the legitimacy of his children and, despite advisers being against it, brought charges in court. He even said he was prepared to go into the box himself and give testimony. He was eventually told he couldn’t, as monarch, do so as they were his own courts. Churchill, then Home Secretary, got involved and it was a whole big thing. Mylius was convicted of libel and sentenced to a year. The king recorded that the ‘damnable lie’ had been in existence for 20 years and hoped it was now settled once and for all. Mylius later moved to the US and repeated the story but no one really paid further attention and it died away. Harry and Meghan just aren’t waiting two decades to quash press malfeasance but anyone sniffing about how it ‘isn’t done’ should be reminded it was indeed ‘done ‘ and by the monarch himself to protect his family.

  27. AGreatDane says:

    Royal…non-royal…IDC. I just wanna see another picture of Archie. Now that Harry is telling the Scots to call him Harry, can we get The Tig back? Meghan as a micro-mommy blogger would be cute. Let the 1000 year old tax evasion scheme known as the British Royal Family do as they wish, the people need recommendations on cloth diapers and homeopathic teething cures!

  28. GuestWho says:

    ETA – This was in response to @Elle at comment #24

    They aren’t really pro-Sussex because they use wording that makes them sound obnoxious and entitled – which just enrages the haters on Twitter. Like this:
    ” because Harry is the Queen’s ‘favorite and others just can’t deal with it.’” That is absolutely designed to set people off.

    There is no way they are using a newspaper that they are in the middle of suing, who has literally hunted this woman for three years to get their side out. It is not how they operate.

    • MeghanNotMarkle says:

      Eggggzactly. On the surface some of these articles might seem, at best, neutral towards the Sussexes. But if you really read them, they’re full of digs at H&M. These articles just make them seem hoity-toity and childish, when their actual actions thus far have proven they’re anything but. And they definitely aren’t supplying any info to a paper that they’re suing.

  29. MeghanNotMarkle says:

    Of course she will! But none of her real friends are talking to the tabloids.

    • Islandgirl says:

      I don’t believe half of these stories and it is a mystery to me that the seemingly legitimate media pick up these stories and run with them.

      I really think that when it comes to the BM this is part of the problem that Harry and Meghan are facing.

      Maybe Kate and William have a real and legitimate reason to make the deals and expose the children because the BM seem to have the ability to influence even legitimate journalists with their “sources from the palace”….whether real or imagined.

  30. Lizzie says:

    I hope they are happy. I also hope their plans all come true.

    I just have a feeling that things are cyclical and the press will have a slow patch and start ‘talking to friends’ of Bill and Cathy and start telling the true story of how they threw H&M under the bus and drove them away.

  31. Lizzie says:

    I cannot wait to see what Meghan wears. I bet the huge crowds who come out to see her when she arrives will make even trump jealous.

  32. Well-Wisher says:

    She has to triumph over adversity for her wellbeing. That goes without saying. None of Meghan’s friends will speak to the Daily Fail.

  33. Awkward symphony says:

    As if her “friends” would speak to a paper that constantly bullies her+that she is suing!