FF: Prince Harry felt like William’s people were ‘throwing Harry under the bus’

Britain's Prince William, Duke of Cambridge (R) and Britain's Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex,  host a reception to officially open the 2018 Illegal Wildlife Trade Conference at St James' Palace in London on October 10, 2018. - The 2018 Illegal Wildlife Trade Conference is the fourth such international conference bringing together heads of state, ministers and officials from nearly 80 countries, alongside NGOs, academics and businesses, to build on previous efforts to tackle this lucrative criminal trade. The conference is being hosted by the UK Government from 11th – 12th October 2018.

I’m sure a lot of people have already started reading Finding Freedom on their Kindles! If you see a good story from FF and you really want me to cover it, tweet @ me (KaiseratCB) or email me at kaiser@celebitchy.com. Until I get a chance to really get into the book, I’m using a variety of sources as I try to cull through the information which was already excerpted, and the information which is new-to-us (or merely the Sussexes’ side of old stories). As we’ve heard already, the palace courtiers were concerned about the fact that the brothers had a significant falling out. Now those stuffy old vipers are suddenly worried that the future of the monarchy is on the line. They honestly didn’t think about that as they were smearing the f–k out of Prince Harry and his wife, but here we are. From Finding Freedom: Harry, Meghan, and the Making of a Modern Royal Family:

High-ranking aides across all three royal households were so alarmed at the press coverage and speculation on social media about a rift between the brothers and their wives that they began openly discussing the impact it could have on the monarchy if things weren’t righted. For months headlines had focused on the fractured relationships between the two couples. And the chatter on social media was just as loud. The whole situation was so out of control, a source said, “even the Queen was concerned.”

Courtiers attended a retreat in the spring of 2019 where the concerns were openly discussed. “We need to design a system to protect the monarchy full stop,” one said. “It’s no secret, the future of this monarchy relies solely on the four people currently in Kensington Palace. The public popularity only lies with them . . . When he [the Prince of Wales] becomes King, the only way it lasts is if the four of them are not at war. We cannot have them at war.”

“Harry was upset that it was playing out so publicly and that so much of the information being reported was wrong,” a source said. “There had been moments where he felt people working with his brother had put things out there to make William look good, even if it meant throwing Harry under the bus. It was a confusing time, and his head was all over the place—he didn’t know who or what to believe, and he and William weren’t talking enough either, which made everything a lot worse.”

[From Finding Freedom: Harry, Meghan, and the Making of a Modern Royal Family]

I was curious if Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand would really lay the blame directly at William’s feet, and here we are. Before this, the FF excerpts seemed to indicate that Harry felt like the general palace intrigue was going against him, but now we can see that Harry knew his brother was behind a good chunk of it. To be clear, I don’t think William was behind *everything*. I don’t think Harry believed that either. But Harry knows his brother. Harry knew that William and William’s people were “throwing Harry under the bus.” And it’s still funny to me that after running one of the most damaging smear campaigns I’ve ever seen, the palace courtiers held an emergency meeting which basically amounted to “what have we done?!?”

Britain's Prince William, Duke of Cambridge (R) and Britain's Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex (2R), host a reception to officially open the 2018 Illegal Wildlife Trade Conference at St James' Palace in London on October 10, 2018. - The 2018 Illegal Wildlife Trade Conference is the fourth such international conference bringing together heads of state, ministers and officials from nearly 80 countries, alongside NGOs, academics and businesses, to build on previous efforts to tackle this lucrative criminal trade. The conference is being hosted by the UK Government from 11th – 12th October 2018.

Photos courtesy of WENN, Avalon Red, Backgrid.

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

125 Responses to “FF: Prince Harry felt like William’s people were ‘throwing Harry under the bus’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Priscila says:

    Harry knew because this is the modus operandi when things go awry: protect the heir at all costs. The cost for William was Harry, therefore all these spins of William being sensible and wise and Harry, impulsive and frail. This went for years, in a more subtle way. To Catherine, the cost was Meghan. She was so comfortable with Meghan made Kate cry stories and how she supposedly put Megahn in her place for speaking with aides stories because it placed her in a good light—this, or she was too, leaking, through Ma Middleton.

    But yeah, will be alot of ” Harry felt this, Harry felt that” because they cannot outright say it.

  2. Tanguerita says:

    the first reviews are in and they are not pretty. Even “The Guardian” shat on it.

    • Elizabeth Regina says:

      I expect the reviews to be awful, especially since a lot of what’s in the book may be true. They did the same to the Diana book, so we’ve seen it all before. Regardless of how badly it is reviewed, it makes the royal family look really awful. They look disorganised, dysfunctional with nobody in control. Time for the RF to stop the leaks, put all the servants in their place and sack all their PR and comms people. It’s been a sh*t show that has severely damaged their brand and standing.

    • Ginger says:

      I don’t expect the U.K. press to like the book. They will push back on it. I’m really enjoying it so far. It reads like other royal biographies. I know it’s a very watered down version of what really happened. I like that this book pushes back on the tabloid stories. That’s what I really wanted.

    • Edna says:

      Isn’t that to be expected from the British media? Why would any of them give the book an unbiased fair review. Hopefully people can form their own opinions after reading the book.

    • Sofia says:

      Not surprised, even if it’s the Guardian. I don’t expect it to get glowing reviews because of 2 reasons: a) the people who wanted a Morton level tell all are going to be severely disappointed because it won’t reveal anything that’s really new. The SussexSquad on Twitter came up with some of these conclusions months ago. b) people aren’t happy this book is being written in the first place. So they’ll shit on it unless it says “Harry and Meghan admit everything was their fault. William and Catherine are perfect angels who can do no wrong. Meghan did in fact have a master plan to take over the royal family. Harry and Meghan are divorcing and Harry’s coming back”

      • Ginger says:

        I think what made Morton’s book so groundbreaking is that there was no social media back then. If there was and Diana had a
        “Squad” like Harry and Meghan do, they would have predicted some of what she revealed.

    • Amy Bee says:

      Is this really a surprise? I think the more revealing reaction to book is that the Royal Family and aides are relieved that book is not as damaging as they thought it would be and it’s funny that people still believe that Harry and Meghan were involved with this book. It tells you that the true story is still yet to be told and will only come out when Harry and Meghan write their own books. But to get back on topic, Harry being thrown under the bus by William is probably the main reason for the feud between them.

      • Ash says:

        Mmmm I find it funny that people still believe that Harry and Meghan were *not* involved with this book. Even if the Guardian is right that a lot of detail on some of these stories isn’t included, with some of the stories that are actually in the book, there’s no way that these didn’t come from M+H, even if it was secondhand via a friend, other source etc. as literally no one else would know some of these things.

        You could argue in response to that that perhaps these friends spoke without authorisation but if they’re telling stories like this without that, then they won’t be friends for much longer – and everyone involved would know that.

      • Priscila says:

        @Ash Harry and Meghan were not involved in this even if your assumption is correct, because if their friends are speaking, it means the words are not directly coming from them. Second hand accounts are the basis of every biography, authorized or not, and you make it sound like it is something out of ordinary, when it is not. Friends speak all the time, with or without a famous person permission, and since the book barely name names, the only way they could know was if secrets were spilled. As far as I know, they are collecting POV from many different sources for ther narrative, therfore these discussion were had or witnessed by several people in contact of him.

        But, if you meant Harry and Meghan knew about the book and told their friends they were free to speak because Omid was NOT Dan Wooten…then yes, they could be considered indirectly involved, but only barely.

      • Ash says:

        “Second hand accounts are the basis of every biography, authorized or not, and you make it sound like it is something out of ordinary, when it is not.”

        100% agree and I never meant to imply that it’s out of the ordinary. But it’s a massive stretch to say they weren’t involved at all – or even “barely” – as I would bet good money that they let their friends know which stories they were free to pass on, especially given the nature of some of these stories.

        Again, this isn’t out of the ordinary at all, but if they claim to be entirely hands off…well, it’s fair to look at that with a bit of healthy skepticism.

      • ABritGuest says:

        based on the excerpts my impression is that this book recounts the tabloid stories the rota knew at the time but couldn’t (or wouldn’t) tell when the smear campaign was in full flow but can now because Meghan is out.

        It sounds like the authors had the standard cooperation from most recent royal bios- see Charles at 70 or Queen of the World where the authors purported they had spoken to friends, aides, family members. the Charles book spoke of his feelings before marrying Diana for example but nobody thinks he sat down for interview for the book. I think that’s the same here- friends, ex friends, current and former palace staff etc are giving their view.

        Plus so much gossip is out there about these people that I think a lot of these bios use previous press clippings etc. In FF excepts I recognise statements from old TV interviews of the Sussexes, from Meghan’s friends& from her court case.

        But I also find some quotes not plausible- without knowing him (!) find it hard to believe William who isn’t much older than me would say “blindsided by lust”. So I think like most royal reporting and particularly where this book is cashing in on the exit drama- I approach with some scepticism

      • Lizzie says:

        I find it funny that people do not understand how a biography works. They were not interviewed for the book. They say so and the authors say so. People who know them were interviewed.

      • Feeshalori says:

        If they ever write their own book in their own words, that’s an autobiography.

    • STRIPE says:

      I would read the Guardians review before you say it’s unfair and “of course they don’t like it!” I actually found it a really measured and balanced review. For example, the author says that Meghan was subject to racist treatment is “a fact” etc.

      • Alexandria says:

        @Ash There’s nothing earth shattering about the allusions in this book except Angela Kelly was outed as the plausible main mean girl for Tiaragata and long-term royal observers here supplemented this with questionable behaviour from her in the past. That was an oh now it makes sense moment. The rest of the speculation and how the Palace reacted are not earth shattering to me at least. So I think anyone, even Celebitches, can write about these allusions without speaking to HM or HM friends.

        I actually liked that BuzzFeed came up with that simple yet impactful article illustrating the racist media treatment of Meghan versus Kate. Start with that.

      • Tanguerita says:

        I actually found the Guardian review rather good, albeit slightly catty. Freeman acknowledges all the problems that Harry and Meghan must have had during their short tenure as Senior royals, but she takes issue with the writing style which seems to be veering into saccharine territory (However, I think it’s on brand with H&M).

      • Ash says:

        @Alexandria (sorry, only just saw your reply!): While the stories may not be earth-shattering, there are also more specific stories than just the Angela Kelly one. Let’s take a simple one, like the thing about Meghan being frustrated when she was “told off” about the H and M necklace. That came from someone who’s close enough to have heard her (justifiably!) venting about it. And no friend would be stupid enough to repeat that story without approval from Meghan.

        Allusions, sure, we all know what’s going on now, at least broadly-speaking. But there are enough specific stories in this book to make it seriously questionable that the sources weren’t instructed/approved to repeat them.

        As mentioned above, this is pretty normal for this kind of book. But assuming it didn’t happen here is a stretch.

    • PrincessK says:

      My copy of the book just arrived in the post. Yippee!

      The book confirms everything we have been saying for years. I have met one of the authors, and he is a lovely genuine person and I bought the book as much for him as l believe in the Sussexes.

    • MaryContrary says:

      So the papers that caused a lot of the issues to begin with aren’t happy with their portrayal? Huh.

    • MarcelMarcel says:

      Hadley Freeman wrote the review and I read it out of curiosity. She has made some insensitive comments on two separate topics- Beyoncé’s feminism and the Rhodes Must Fall activism in South Africa. I don’t think she’s educated enough about misogynior to write a review on a book about Meghan and Harry. (Nor are the other journalists probably).
      Anyhow I don’t think the Guardian review was unnecessarily harsh. I just think Freeman needs to research anti-racism and intersectional feminism. All the jewels and luxury in the world can’t make up for how Meghan and Archie were dehumanised by the press.
      I haven’t read the book yet. I hope it provides a counter narrative to the misogynior fuelled malicious rumours spread by the press. Stories can humanise people hopefully that’s what the book does for Meghan.

    • L4frimaire says:

      I’ve only read a few chapters so far. I’m not crazy about the writing style and would have lied a bit more analysis of the political backdrop of what was going on in U.K. or even where the standing of the Royal family was at the time they met. It’s touched on briefly on that but wanted more of that. However, I’m reading the book for the behind the scenes information and to correct some of the egregious rumors out there. It’s very much a real time writing, more lie a compilation of magazine excerpts. It has the immediacy of things still being played out and unresolved. 10 years from now, this would be a completely different book. I don’t expect rave reviews or Pulitzers, but the book is doing what it set out to do and creating a lot of buzz and discussion. It centers the couple and gives their perspective. It’s not all cheerleading either.The only other royal biography I’ve read is Marie Antoinette by Antonia Fraser, so very different vibe and context for sure.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        I’d recommend Leonie Frieda’s bio on Catherine de’ Medici. It presents an interesting and nuanced perspective on a woman who has been reviled for centuries.

        Antonia Fraser’s bio on Charles II is also very good.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        I would recommend Hannah Pakula’s “An Uncommon Woman” about IRI Victoria, Princess Royal, The Empress Frederick III if you like royal biographies.

      • MadameX says:

        Ooh, thanks! I’ve been looking for some biography recommendations.

      • L4frimaire says:

        Queen of Fashion by Caroline Weber is also a very good book on Marie Antoinette as seen through her clothing .and actually preferred it to Fraser’s book. Biographies are tricky. Did not like Christopher Hitches bio of Thomas Jefferson, for example. For thisFinding Freedom book ,people are so looking for sources and what friends talked, but forget that there were a lot of observers who aren’t necessarily friends of either side who saw a lot, and the another’s were right there with the press pack and got a lot of gossip first hand from their colleagues. Look how Dan Wooten can’t keep his mouth shut.

    • PrincessK says:

      I am not reading any reviews, l am going to read the book and do my own review.

      • Olivia says:

        Brilliant. I’m doing same. Each review is their own perspective and it can be twisted to suit that persons agenda. When it comes to H&M it’s better not to listen to any review. You can’t synonymously have a whole country on one side of the coin ie monarchy. It makes the whole argument fishy and unscrupulous. For me It infers most of these reviewers have been paid and aren’t to be trusted.

    • Jessica says:

      Royal biographies are generally not well-reviewed EVER; they’re usually seen as hagiographies, not high literature, Many of them aren’t even particularly well-written (though there are exceptions). The Guardian has been good about recognising the UK press maltreatment of Meghan, but they generally aren’t sympathetic to any royals, so they’ll slate the rest of the press for how they treat her on a racist, xenophobic and sexist level, while also getting in their own digs at them because they’re rich, privileged and The Guardian has a small “r” republican stance on the monarchy. The book is going to be a best seller and that’s all that matters in terms of getting their side of the story out.

      There will also be a certain amount of professional jealousy toward Omid and Carolyn due to the level of insider information they were able to obtain about a couple who are notorious for guarding their privacy. That’s why you see a raft of books coming out now about Harry and Meghan, trying to piggyback on this book. The same thing happened with Diana: Her True Story. But Her True Story is the only one anyone still talks about or remembers, because of all the insider information (that came directly from Diana herself). That book was written by a tabloid hack and wasn’t high literature either, but that’s not the point. The light he was able to shed on Diana’s perspective and experience is where it had value and is also where this book has value re: Harry and Meghan’s perspective and experience.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        Hannah Pakula’s biographies are excellent as they are well researched and well written.

        Anything by Robert Massie is excellent.

    • Thirtynine says:

      Yes, but the Guardian article was by Hadley Freedman, whose articles are clearly anti-Harry and Meghan, and picking up same talking points as the tabloids. The podcast on the Guardian last week was very disappointing. The Guardian I don’t expect to be pro-monarchy, but do expect higher quality journalism and analysis than what we get when they cover the royals. They need to use just regular political writers. after all, if the royal family are going to squirrel away a great big chunk of your countries wealth, and have their members be held above the law, then these things are political issues and should be covered as such. Lazily and contemptuously covering them in a bitchy, tabloid-like tone fails to shine that spotlight on how corrupted the system of royalty is. Do better, Guardian!

  3. ABritGuest says:

    As I’ve been saying it says a lot that the palace were relieved about this book& that’s because people who are sympathetic to the Firm are behind it. Seems like the senior blood royals are protected and only shade is for aides and perhaps Kate. It makes what observers and what the press themselves knew was a smear campaign look like just some misunderstanding.

    I’m not surprised if reviews aren’t great. What I had seen from the excepts read like fan fiction which is typical of these royal bios on the younger royals and a rehash of tabloid stories. There’s a real story to be told and people on the royal beat aren’t going to tell it. I think the Guardian alluded to that saying it doesn’t set out why the Sussexes felt unsupported and why Andrew is much more protected.

    Dan Wootton is still trying to drag William in though and was pushing back against Victoria Arbiter and tweeting his article that claims William and AK47 teamed up to deny Meghan access to royal jewels. He’s a loose cannon

    • Alexandria says:

      I second this. Doesn’t even look like the stupid courtiers are blamed for this. The only revelation to me was Angela Kelly is the main mean girl responsible for Tiaragata.

    • Sofia says:

      If that bit about Wooton is true (I don’t really have a Twitter account, I just lurk and I don’t really follow the royal reporters) then I’m surprised. He really does want to drag William in the tiara/jewels mess for some reason…

    • Becks1 says:

      I think Dan Wootton thinks he is helping…somebody (the palace?) with that story about AK and Willileaks conspiring to stop Meghan from having any royal jewels…but it just really makes them look mean and petty.

      I expect the book to just be a rehash of the headlines with some detail and a more pro-Sussex stance (even if its not 100% pro Sussex.) I don’t expect anything earth shattering and I think if people do, they’ll be disappointed.

      But, I do find it very interesting that the palace was so freaked out over the book. And again, leaking statements like “they’re relieved because it could have been so much worse” is not really a good look .

      • Noki says:

        Has Dan Wootens leak been help accountable,if a leak from the Sussex house was found to be feeding the press about the Doolittles heads would have rolled.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Nope, the leaker still hasn’t been fired for his boyfriend being paid for royal info by Wootton.

    • Priscila says:

      Yep, this has been my feeling. I did not pre order the book and I trust this site to do a good coverage., I like to discuss it because I studied History and I find it fascinating how arsinine courtiers are as a whole and how particularly bad the Windsors are at this. I mean, I think the Hannovers were a shit show, but the Windsors are not that better.

      But I want to be generous. The Brit Press is selling the idea this book is co written by Meghan, and we know it is nothing of the sort. Now that is out, we can see the Sussexes were not lying. They were respecting Free Press because they knew this book is not a take down and would not be telling harmful lies, but that is it.

      I predict the Press will say somthing like ” even their authorized biography fails to place them as victims because they are not victims.” because of course they do…nervermind it only confirms what the Sussexes said, that they did not sit down or authorized the book.

    • blue36 says:

      I wonder, what kind of personality does one need to possess to be nicknamed after an assault rifle?

  4. You know, I have no idea how it came to be that the spares were treated this badly. It used to be that all members were protected, but for some reason in the 80′s, all that changed. Anyone Harry married would have been subjected to unfair, constant abuse and constant undermining of the credibility of her work. I realize also that William has no business having a faction of his own. It’s no wonder that the Windsors are so messed up, too many have their own faction.

    • Ash says:

      Princess Margaret may have a few words to say about this “only starting in the 80s”.

      • morrigan01 says:

        Yeah, from what I can tell, spare heirs throughout British Royal History have been treated like shit. I mean hell, people do know that Queen Mary I locked her half-sister, the future Elizabeth I, the the Tower of London and had her execution order drawn up, right? All Mary had to do was sign it and Bess would have lost her head for treason.

        So yeah, rivalries and political maneuvering have always had spare heirs being treated like crap most of their lives. Even being executed at at times.

    • Alexandria says:

      It really showed to me how dumb the Windsors are. What HM tried could be a blueprint for WK kids to thrive and survive when they become working royals. What if one of them was gay or also wanted to marry a non white person? All they’re teaching is protect the heir at all costs. And they want Harry to be the fun dumb Harry all the time so that he can be the fall guy or the next Andrew. No wonder Harry needed therapy and wanted to remain in the army to get his own life together.

      And seeing how Kate is, George’s wife must be the top Stepford wife who bows to her husband and mother in law. And the daughter in laws cannot be too pretty to distract William lol.

      • lanne says:

        It’s going to be hell for poor Charlotte. The media’s going to eat her alive. Imagine what will happen when she goes through her inevitable awkward phase. She and Louis will have no blueprint for making a role for themselves, and they will exist solely to be thrown to the wolves on behalf of George. Those kids’ best hope is to be outrageously average in every way. If Louis or Charlotte are smarter, more ambitious, or more charismatic than George, then their lives will be hell. If I were a parent in that situation (as a married-in), I would do the best I could to shield and protect those kids, keep them all out of the public eye as much as possible, and start thinking about possibilities for their futures even now. I would be terrified as a mother, seeing the writing on the wall. I don’t think Kate is terrified. I think she believes she has “won” the battle against the Sussexes.

      • A says:

        @lanne, can we please not do this before it actually happens? I find the discussions of how “it’s going to be hell for Charlotte in the press!!!!!!’ so weird. She’s a child, let’s discuss that bridge when we come to it. Speculation about the kids in this way is just off.

      • Nic919 says:

        Kate has shown to be a believer in the hierarchical system so her spares have no hope because she won’t be like Diana trying to protect Harry from the grey men. She will toss them to the wolves. Already they permit the media to characterize Charlotte in a negative way and promote gender stereotypes themselves.

      • Nic919 says:

        It’s not speculation when we see what the media is doing to Charlotte even now. They aren’t in a healthy environment and the Cambridges have already made a deal with the devil with the tabloids which will only last for so long.

    • Alexandria says:

      I still think all members are protected except for the married ins. Anne doesn’t seem to give a damn and she does her own thing. Andrew is protected. Charles fumbled so they kept putting the spotlight on Diana. Fergie was a mess but that was convenient for Charles sometimes and Diana sold more stories so she became the main target.

      The treatment of Meghan and Archie is the first time racism came into the equation. All the furor from the racist media, courtiers and nasty UK netizens on Meg is because of racism, full stop. Because in terms of etiquette and supposed protocols, Meg and Harry have not done anything radically different from the other royals. Yet they are the ones who have to pay back the renovations costs and not use HRH for their work. Oh and of course they cannot be the ones taking private jets!

      • A says:

        Anne doesn’t give a damn because, by the hierarchy in the royal family, Anne was a complete nonentity at the time. She still is. She was 4th in line after Charles, outranked by both Andrew and Edward. She might be Princess Royal, but neither of her husbands had a rank or the title of HRH, and neither do her children. None of them rank high enough for her to even be given much attention by the palace.

        Anne follows the rules laid out for her by seemingly staying quiet and doing her own thing, on the surface. But she has also flexed her muscles in the press and behaved grandiosely when she’s felt overshadowed by married-ins. And Fergie was an absolute disaster, and the palace bears some of the blame for that, because of how little she was guided and how much she was left hung out to dry by everyone. Andrew was a consummate oward who couldn’t stand up to his mother or the palace machine at the end of the day.

      • Nic919 says:

        Anne got to have her flings in private and has generally been treated well by the media so she doesn’t care. She cared enough to want the princess royal title and also wanted the change in rank order to be above the married ins when Camilla was likely to marry Charles. But she was smart in not bothering the give her children titles through her first husband and she’s managed to get an estate that does quite well for her family.

        The queen should have told all her spares to adapt for the real world but she couldn’t understand that. She’s created the vast system of hangers on that pretend to work for the country but really don’t do much of anything.

    • Candikat says:

      Historically, spares have always been existential threats to the heir. You’re a disaffected spare who hungers for power? Kill your brother (and his family if necessary) and *poof* you’re the next King! Machiavelli literally wrote the playbook.

      Not saying that’s the game plan of modern spares, but history would suggest that the heir’s power is dependent upon the spare being closely controlled. I’m sure this dynamic has been passed down through centuries of European royalty.

  5. aquarius64 says:

    Well the smear campaign has backfired big time. With the book out people can put all the excerpts together and make their own judgments. The BRF can’t afford to cut Meghan loose now or it looks like the palace is pushing for a divorce.

    Can’t wait for the chapters on Bad Dad and Scammy. They’re not going to look good.

    • 809Matriarch says:

      They already are pushing for a divorce. There have been several recent articles saying Harry is welcome back – WITHOUT Meghan.

  6. Sofia says:

    I’m not surprised to hear Harry had his suspicions. And I don’t think he’s wrong. And like Kaiser, I don’t think he’s /solely/ responsible. I think the Yorks, HM, Middletons and Charles all had something to gain if they bullied Meghan which in turn would uplift themselves

    • Lizzie says:

      I mentioned on another post, no retaliatory smear campaigns from Harry or Meghan. That says so much about them as human beings.

  7. Becks1 says:

    As for this particular excerpt – the interesting part to me is that “he and William weren’t talking either” – so they weren’t talking as the leaks and stories ramped up and the Great Smear Campaign kept rolling on. But why weren’t they talking to begin with? That just points to something else happening behind the scenes outside of William throwing Harry under the bus continually.

    • ABritGuest says:

      But that’s what’s funny. We are meant to believe that fallout is just because William warned Harry to take it slow with Meghan but then he was his best man where I did think William looked supportive enough of nervous Harry. Obviously something happened or was discovered post the wedding but everyone dances around it.

      What’s interesting is suggestion that an employee of Eugenie’s and Prince Andrew might have leaked news of the relationship to Camilla Tominey. I’m curious what the motivation would have been for that reveal..

      But I agree that likely various factions were leaking on the Sussexes and I always thought that degree wife comment was from Andrew.

      • Becks1 says:

        I thought the degree wife comment had been attributed to Sophie? But we know the “showgirl” comment was definitely from Phillip.

        I have never believed that the fallout between the brothers was over William advising Harry to take it slow. I think that ticked Harry off, he may have responded angrily to William, but I don’t think that was the reason they stopped talking.

      • notasugarhere says:

        If Harry hadn’t had William as his best man, it would have been an immense scandal. Even if they were feuding at the time, with William playing it up as fake supportive older brother in public? Harry was still going to toe the royal line and have William as his best man. He might rather have had Seeiso or Nacho, but they were never options.

      • sunday says:

        ITA, ABritGuest – we all know that Harry wears his heart on his sleeve, and if he and William were on shaky ground at the wedding then we would have plainly seen it written all over Harry’s face.

        I don’t discount the allegations that “something happened” around the time of the wedding, but agree that I don’t think Harry or Meghan found out what that something was (or at least who was behind it) until after the fact.

      • Nic919 says:

        The smearing didn’t really happen until the tour in Australia so I don’t think the breaking point between William and Harry had happened at the time of the wedding. Neither are such great actors to contain their emotions if they hated each other. (See Commonwealth Service).

    • SofiasSideEye says:

      My theory is that not long after the wedding Harry found out that Will/KP was behind the Thomas Markle debacle. And it would have made it so much worse finding out about it after Will had served as Harry’s best man. To find out that W had been behind actually trying to ruin the wedding? That would’ve been devastating to both H&M, but especially Harry.

      • Jaded says:

        I think that’s a very plausible reason. That plus the sneering and eye-rolling at the wedding, the foundation monies being misappropriated, the smears, leaks, lies and tacit support of racist media, all finally added up and the war between the Cambridges and Sussexes went full tilt.

      • SofiasSideEye says:

        Oh, the way they all acted at the wedding was very telling, the disdain was palpable. And they wouldn’t have had the nerve to act out like that if there wasn’t disrespect for H&M coming from the top in that family. No one wanted that wedding to happen, and after it did then they went even harder after Meghan in order to end the marriage, and then it got so much worse after her pregnancy announcement.

        The RF don’t know how obvious it all looks from the outside. They really didn’t care what was done to Meghan as long as she went away, and they still want that as per all of their “come back, Harry,” articles. Evil people.

      • Nic919 says:

        Kate’s face during that wedding ranged from smirks to grumpy looks and her half ass smile in the formal photo is a disgrace. She can hyena grin for strangers but can’t show a happy emotion for her brother in law’s wedding.

  8. Noki says:

    William will definitely start defending himself now,one thing he hates is openly being called out on his bully antics.

  9. Ariel says:

    I don’t think the courtiers ever took the position of- what have we done?
    B/c thru would never take the responsibility for the damage they caused independently and following orders from the petty white trash with money Windsors.

    Instead maybe their position was – Harry and Megan aren’t playing by our rules they have ruined everything – now we must heroically fix it and save the monarchy.
    These people are gross- across the board.

    Glad Meg and her family got out.

  10. morrigan01 says:

    Think I now know why Marie Claire and others has that inane article about Harry and William needing to “mend their rift”to protect the “future of the monarchy” came from. Advance damage control from William and/or KP.

    And I’m going to say something that everyone just tapped danced around saying when it came to that saving the monarchy depends on William and Harry mending their rift stuff: What if Harry doesn’t give a shit about “saving” the monarchy?

    Look, I’m not saying that Harry doesn’t still love and care about his brother. I don’t think he’d ever wish William any harm or something. But you *can* love someone and not like them. At all. And I think that is where Harry is right now with William. After everything Harry feels about the press, for his brother to throw him under the bus? That his brother was behind the smears? No.

    And Harry has NEVER had any love for the monarchy. He wanted out long before Meghan was on the scene. Why the hell would HE care about saving it? What does saving it do when it’s brought him nothing but heartache and never protected his wife and child from vicious racist attacks, all to protect the same person who was green lighting it and green lighting thrown him under the bus as well?

    Harry is under zero obligation to try and save something William may have set fire to. Harry’s out. He left and he isn’t coming back. He isn’t going to “save” this shit-show institution, especially by letting William off the hook on this. He’s under no obligation to.

    • notasugarhere says:

      I don’t think deep down William wants the monarchy to last, again he doesn’t want to be king. He wants the unearned adulation and PR protection, but he also wants to leave and be a private citizen. He wants it to last long enough for him to inherit hundreds of millions without paying a penny in taxes. Then he’d be fine with taking the money and running to Switzerland, leaving the UK to burn for all he cares. Or to run to the UAE in the case of ex-king Juan Carlos.

      • February-Pisces says:

        He hates the monarchy but being king is all he has going for him.

      • Alexandria says:

        I have the same feeling as NOTA. More privacy for him and less work. Or, he might let George reign earlier but of course ensure his wealth is protected for his retirement. Once in a while, come out to the balcony to get some adulation and put on a nice uniform.

      • morrigan01 says:

        ^^^ What @February-Pisces said.

        William IS a Royal who could never survive outside of the Royal Bubble in the real world. He doesn’t have the drive or motivation that would be needed to. He may hate the monarchy, but it is the only thing he’s got that gets him close to what he’d likely really want to be, which is just some moneyed landed-gentry guy who lives off his inherited wealth for the rest of his life in leisure – his kids raised by nannies, his wife the prefect trophy while he still has affairs on the side which she turns a blind eye to, never working, doing nothing and contributing nothing. Living the Life of Riley.

        *That’s*, IMO, the life William really wants. And if he could have it without the monarchy? He’d jump at it.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        “William IS a Royal who could never survive outside of the Royal Bubble in the real world.”

        True, but he also is an a$$hole and even the aristocracy knows it.

        Would anyone want to be friends with this man if he was not the future William V? Would any of the Turnip Toffs (his so called buddies) want anything to do him if he wasn’t King? I do not think they would.

      • A says:

        This is also why the palace courtiers had to finally settle down with their grumbling regarding Kate. They would have much preferred William marry an aristocrat, or better yet, a minor royal, with the appropriate ancestry and lineage, than marry Kate. But they figured out that Kate wants to be Queen badly enough that she could be counted on to keep William in the fold as the future King. Kate will also never consent to a divorce, so she’s suitable on the two counts everyone cared about the most. The aides cut their losses and figured it was better that it be her than someone else who couldn’t be counted on to keep the institution intact.

      • Lowrider says:

        William wants to be king he doesn’t want to do the charity appearances.

  11. JaneDoesWerk says:

    This makes me think that no one is going to specifically mention William’s affair with Rose. To me that really was the end, that was when negative stories about Meghan reallllyyyyy ramped up and became stifling and she was pregnant.

    • morrigan01 says:

      Don’t forget the Oceanic Tour. When it became known she was pregnant and With that balcony moment in Fiji.

      It wasn’t great before then, but after the success of that tour? All the attacking really ramped up.

      • Steph says:

        Can you elaborate on the Fiji balcony thing? Or direct me? I keep keep seeing it mentioned but I don’t know the story.

      • Becks1 says:

        It was definitely the Oceanic tour that triggered the smear campaign – at least timing-wise. I don’t know if it was the huge success of the tour (and yet another successful Invictus Games), the pregnancy announcement, or a combination of the two – but that was when the hate really kicked up another level. That was when stories like tiara-gate dropped, making Kate cry, etc.

      • morrigan01 says:

        @Steph here is a YouTube clip of the balcony moment in Fiji: https://youtu.be/c4MGULrW_wQ?t=69

        When I saw that moment, I have to admit, I immediately thought “oh no, SOMEBODY in the RF is going to be jealous of this, I just know it.” Still feel I’m right about that.

      • Steph says:

        Wow. I see it now. I don’t think I realized what a petty jealous b*tch Willam was yet. I was used to him throwing Harry under the bus when he (William) was getting bad press but I didn’t think he’d take it as far as throwing him under the bus bc’s Harry’s was better.

      • RoyalBlue says:

        yes Oceanic is when the smear campaign was ramped up to level 10. in the middle of the tour Kensington announced that the sussexes would be splitting from KP.

    • Alexandria says:

      The press could have written about 2 other things that would have been bigger news: William’s alleged affair and Andrew’s alleged shenanigans with Epstein. These 2 allegations would threaten the monarchy much more except at worst William could divorce and move on. Andrew is another game altogether.

      The fact the Palace said NOTHING to defend HM, removed Harry’s military titles, removed their HRH status for their work tells me…they are scared about Andrew bringing the whole shit down. And the uppity courtiers don’t like reporting to non white royals. And these royals and or courtiers did not want a mixed child from Meghan entering the RF. There I said it.

    • Sofia says:

      They won’t mention the Rose/William rumours for the same reason why nobody outright wants to say what the “real issue” is or what this supposedly bad thing happened just before/after the wedding.

      Fear of lawsuits/palace lawyers. Plus a lot of these “journalists” have respect for the Queen so they apparently keep some of the really “scandalous” stuff out of the papers.

      • Lizzie says:

        The book is supposed to be about the Sussex’s so I can see it not being mentioned if it did not affect Harry. Maybe that will be the next book, fingers crossed.

      • Alexandria says:

        Right NOTA.

        Understood Sofia. But there are ways to flood the news stand with these allegations without being sued. But I understand yes, because the Queen has been around for long time, the media generally respects her. But again…this does not make the media look good. Thanks Murdoch!

  12. Steph says:

    For the people in the know @arthistorian @notasugarhere etc. Why do they find the rift between Harry and William so detrimental? It’s no secret that Charles can’t stand Andrew and that doesn’t seem to be a big deal. Was it in the past?

    • notasugarhere says:

      For a blink of an eye, Andrew was seen as more appealing than Charles. But only a blink. Charles was never going to be outshone, outworked, or out-loved by Andrew. The same cannot be said of William vs. Harry.

      Historically? Royals are people who killed relatives to gain power and money. You don’t want the spare being more popular in case of an uprising, usurping of the throne, etc.

      • Steph says:

        So bc Harry may outshine William, do they think that Archie will outshine George making interest extremely far from the crown? Cuz they can’t actually be worried about a usurping…

      • morrigan01 says:

        @Steph It doesn’t have to be Archie. Charolette or Louie aren’t supposed to outshine George either, but there is no telling, because one of them could. (Of course they are all too young to even guess if this could be a thing right now).

        The Heir is the most important above all, no matter what. That is the thought process wrt all of this in The Firm.

    • PrincessK says:

      Nota, is right Andrew was popular for a short time and then rapidly fell out of favour, even his wife’s antics drew little sympathy for him. He quickly got a reputation as being pompous, boorish and generally unpleasant be around. Harry on the other hand is the star of the family and the most like Diana, he is kind, sensitive, and thoughtful with an easy going engaging personality, everything that William isn’t. If this was in medieval or Tudor times, William would have plotted to either banish his brother or imprison him in the Tower or worst concoct a story of treason. History will retell the story of Harry and William and William will not look good.

      • Alexandria says:

        @PrincessK I realised before Meghan, a lot of photos showed people around Harry laughing with him or he made them laugh or smile. Kate really showed she loved Harry’s presence. Explains all these passive aggressiveness about Harry not knowing his place, but in actual fact they miss him so much.

        What a pity this family is daft.

      • Thinker says:

        PrincessK, close, but no cigar. This may yet turn into the real life version of the game of thrones-remember the Wars of the Roses? Two houses fighting against each other. Only one can win. Technically the first commoner to marry into the royal family since Elizabeth Woodville IS Kate Middleton. And on the other side is a guy in exile named Henry…..Hmmm.

        Now, don’t look at me like I am a kook just yet. This is not the 1400s. I am thinking more about the future of the crown since Elizabeth cannot live forever. I predict Charles might not be able to keep the peace if trends continue: he is a hesitater. I also know for SURE that whatever is in Carolyn and Omid’s book is the EDITED version and they are most likely sitting on the bigger stuff. They don’t want to get sued.

        But I think what is really going down with big brother is that he did have an affair and this got Harry furious. Wills really was a snobby little butt goblin to Meghan since the company he keeps has a rep for private shows in blackface and some other paleoconservative views that are revolting. I think that after 2 decades of being treated as a shield for his brother’s bad behavior, plus the constant mistreatment where he is always lesser even if Will were to unzip his skin and have horns, hooves, a tail, and a voice like in The Exorcist, well, Harry finally found the courage with Meghan’s help to tell a lot of folks to go f— themselves. All his loyalty was for NOTHING.

        One of the problems of monarchy is that it is hierarchical and does not always reward TALENT. The prickly, chauvinistic, entitled, ball busting, and backwards thinking brother is the wrong guy to be in the driver’s seat. He is very spoiled. He is calm now because Charles is not king yet, but watch out-his loyalty can turn on a dime. A lesser known fact about the monarchy is that the line of succession can be changed by Parliament and monarchs HAVE been deposed that way.

        Tick, tock, tick, tock. The FF King may yet reveal his true and deeply unappealing colors….the public can clamor for an alternative….I wonder…. I wonder…

    • A says:

      The press are the ones who have hyped up William and Harry as an inseparable duo, especially in the tragedy of Diana’s passing. Andrew and Charles were not linked by any such trauma. There was never really any indication, at any point, that they were all that close–something which was compounded by the huge age gap between the two of them (something like 10 years or so). So they were never marketed to the public on the basis of their closeness, unlike William and Harry, behind whom the public united in its support after their mother died.

      And this generated a lot of sympathy for the institution in turn. Nobody wanted the monarchy to end, exactly. They wanted the Queen and Charles to go away, but they definitely didn’t want to cut off William from his rightful position as monarch, because they felt Diana had gone through too much for her son to be denied this. Harry is a part of that image which engendered this sympathy. People were hugely struck by the sight of the two of them walking behind their mother’s coffin.

      So the image of the future of the monarchy has always been one where William and Harry have been there. I’ll bet most of the planning for the future has centered around that as well, which is why they’re so thrown by Harry’s departure. It’s also a part of the reason why they want Harry to come back alone. This is the image and picture they’ve had of the monarchy, the one around which they’ve based most of their plans and provisioning for the future. Which is why Harry’s departure has really upended their ship, so to speak.

  13. Snazzy says:

    Just as an aside – I went on Amazon to order Finding Freedom today, thought I’d get the kindle just to start reading right away. And for the first time, the Kindle is more expensive than the book! Clearly people want to get their hands on it asap.

  14. Lizzie says:

    No smear campaign coming from Harry though, was there? That should be a headline somewhere.

  15. PrincessK says:

    Very soon the Fail will wheel out ‘sources’ and ‘friends’ of the Cambridge’s to refute everything. I actually feel that the British media realised that the embiggening of the Cambridge’s is not a money spinner. Even the Prince Andrew mess doesn’t attract the expected levels of attention. There is no real interest in the RF unless it involves the Sussexes and that will haunt the silly Cambridge’s forever.

  16. Liz version 700 says:

    Honestly reading about this family is exhausting. It must have been so hard to be pregnant and facing all of this incredible BS. I would never go back and if pressured I would suggest they start making the heirs do their jobs.

  17. Steph says:

    Do you think the palace has put together yet that H&M will always be more popular internationally bc the vast majority of the Commonwealth is made of brown colonized people? They are always going to like the royal who looks like them better.

    • Alexandria says:

      Nope. They are daft and the immediate concern now is surviving Brexit although they should realize that with Brexit, ties with the Commonwealth countries are even more important to maintain. Short-sighted, petulant Future Future King William is tired of talking about race, and even wanted to banish HM to Africa remember? Also he ended racism with that football match so everything is dandy. The Queen was in British Vogue as a change maker without even touching on BLM. Everything’s good. Look at their faces during HM wedding and of course we cannot forget Princess Michael’s brooch and that slave painting in WK living room. Harry was attacked for talking about their privilege. The Palace could have chimed in to agree with or work with Harry so that the Commonwealth could see an enlightened UK. But they didn’t. So I don’t think they realize that their appaling smear campaign on Meghan and racist microaggressions are reflecting badly on them. The heir must be protected at all costs so trying to court the Commonwealth is an afterthought. His position and popularity in the UK matters first especially with Brexit. Let’s see what happens after Queen dies.

  18. Alexandria says:

    @Steph you should see the interview with the four of them. Meghan articulated her views very well and with confidence. I can see why charities would like to be involved with her. WK just fumbled along and talked in generic circles. They did not do their research. That was actually the first time I listened to Meghan speak work wise and I was shocked.

    • Steph says:

      I think I’ve seen it (I’m thinking the was a lot of blue?) but I don’t remember it. I have definitely seen the 4 of them separately so I know what you said is true. Meghan is by far the best. She’s better at public speaking in general, she’s always prepared and it seems that if she isn’t writing her speech herself, she’s had a hand in it so she can speak confidently and not fumble. Harry is an ok public speaker but again always seems prepared. Kate is a terrible public speaker (that’s not a bad thing bc to me that’s more of a talent than something you can learn), doesn’t prepare, and has to read everything word for word bc she has no hand in writing it. William is just…..I can’t. He just doesn’t care. He’s all im the heir take what I give you.

      • HeatherC says:

        I agree Steph. Kate is a horrible public speaker. That’s not a slam, not everyone is good at public speaking. However her weakness at public speaking could be offset by being prepared, and that is entirely her fault if she is not, which she rarely is. She’s terribly keen to do her job but it stops at that (and often you need a subtitle to learn that she’s terribly keen about something). William doesn’t see the need to prepare or research or fake interest. He is the first born son, he doesn’t have to do anything to earn anything and he knows that. All he has to do is have a pulse and he’ll be crowned king and inherit even more privileges.

      • Jaded says:

        @Heather C – Diana was a terrible public speaker at first, shy and hesitant, but she was barely out of her teens when she married in. After that she was diligent about getting the public speaking training she needed to speak confidently and knowledgeably about the things that were becoming meaningful to her. Keen? She had almost a decade to sharpen her skills but the only things she sharpened were her talons.

      • HeatherC says:

        @Jaded. Exactly. She spoke knowledgeably about the subjects, something Kannot won’t do. I’m not a good public speaker, I’ve taken the classes, had advisors, I still have poor form more to do with being super introverted. But I am able to make up for my poor skills with knowledge and interest. I can field any question on the subject and convey interest. Unlike Duchess “Can You Test The Smell By Smelling It?”)

      • Lizzie says:

        Just go to Toastmasters FFS.

      • HeatherC says:

        @Lizzie was that to me?

      • Alexandria says:

        @HeatherC agreed. Public speaking is not easy but there are other ways to perform at work or find your own strengths. Kate, the first graduate wife, would certainly not be appraised well if the working royals had annual appraisals like private firms. I can’t even picture her and William checking emails, I think their staff would be the one clearing their inboxes. Catherine Quinn left her to do more charity work. That doesn’t make sense and I wonder if they even realise the shade there.

      • Lizzie says:

        @Heather – NO, not at you. It was at Kate. Sorry for the confusion.

  19. Lizzie says:

    Could Harry, if he wanted, run for PM?
    I realize he probably does not want to do this, just my curiosity. Prime Minister Prince Harry, oh that would be delightful. Think the queen would give the use of HRH back to him?

    • Steph says:

      I’m not a royal expert but I know the family isn’t even allowed to show support for a candidate. They to remain publicly politically neutral. I don’t know if that’s changed since he stepped down as a working royal but he definitely couldn’t do it with his HRH title restored.

      • Lizzie says:

        I guess I am curious where that line is drawn. As the queen has apparently prevented Harry from representing her or working as a Senior Royal is he a free agent?
        Again, I know he has not interest in running for office. I am just curious if he could because it would solve so many problems if the RF was prevented from talking about Harry.

    • Alexandria says:

      Even if he technically could be PM, my take is Harry is not interested in politics per se even though he has to work with politicians. He is likely interested in community work and philanthropy but full-time politics is not his passion and would take his focus away.

  20. February-Pisces says:

    I just bought my copy from Waterstones, I’ve not started it yet, it looks like we’re all gonna have a mass finding freedom reading party. It’s gonna be an interesting few days.

  21. BnLurkN4eva says:

    It became obvious very quickly that William was directing his people to undermine Harry and Meghan. Only God could convince me that William wasn’t the lead in smearing Harry and Meghan and I’m sure that at some point Harry and Meghan had irrefutable proof of William’s dirty hands, which is when the rift cemented imo.

  22. nicegirl says:

    It’s crazy how being run over by a bus driven by family actually feels like being run over by a bus driven by family. Painful af

    So glad M&H have created their own space to breathe. I’m hoping it gets even better.

    I’m thrilled to have received my Audible copy of FF!!

  23. Lizzie says:

    William was so stupid and short sited. If he had, and listened to, good advisors they would have told him to be like the queen and take the long view. Harry and Meghan were shining bright but that may have faded or they could divorce. It will be many decades (hopefully) before he is king and so much will have changed.
    He was stupid to overreact. Now he has lost his brother and best ally. Harry is the only one who has not been to the tabloids trying to smear someone. Who else can William say that about? Not his wife. One day the older generations will be gone and William will need public support. Good luck with Harry gone, documented backstabbing legacy and unpopular wife who is called Duchess Dolittle in the press. William’s backstabbing have kept Harry and Meghan on the front pages and brought them more public support than was ever dreamed of.

  24. A says:

    I’m not quite sure this is the place for this, but I don’t know exactly where else to talk about it. I’m starting on the book now, and in the first chapter, this stuck out to me: “Scrolling on his iPhone, [Harry] sometimes couldn’t stop himself from reading the comments on the article.”

    So Prince Harry reads the comments, on what I presume are the Fail, the Dim, etc. On the extreme (really extreme) off chance he reads the comments here, I just wanna say, pls stop reading the comments on the Fail! FFS! Rule #1 to living a pleasant life! Come on!

    • T says:

      It doesn’t even need to be the fail. From what I heard he read the Guardian or telegraph? And the comments there are not the greatest either. There has been so many negative comments spread out in more reputable news sources than just the fail.

      • A says:

        @T, I know right, man needs to keep off the comments sections just in general. None of the bigger papers have decent comments, ever.

    • Mentos_fresh says:

      Totally agree the Fail comments are toxic and I gave up on their articles years ago. So I appreciate celebitchy alot because of the royal commentary. I do kinda wish Prince William would read some of the comments here about himself but I think it takes a higher level of perception/ awareness to take on criticism and grow so probably a waste of time.

    • February-Pisces says:

      I hope he does read the comments here, if not someone needs to send him a link. I wouldn’t be surprised if he even commented under a pseudonym. I think all celebs do that, I know I would do that if I was famous.