Andrew Morton: The Sussexes had ‘the opportunity to go wherever they please’

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle visit Reprezent 107.3FM in Brixton

In the Cultural Reset interview, Prince Harry spoke about the palaces’ first reactions to his then-girlfriend Meghan Markle, and the internal discussions around their engagement. While Harry didn’t provide a timeline, my educated guess is that for Meghan and Harry’s first year of dating, Kensington Palace, Clarence House and Buckingham Palace were all on a “wait and see” strategy, because no one could believe that Harry would actually marry Meghan. Once they got engaged or it was clear they were heading that way, I think that when all of these conversations began to take place. Like, probably the fall of 2017, that’s when courtiers began coming to Harry and saying sh-t like “we can’t pay for her” and “she can’t get security” and “she should keep her day job.” That’s how “welcoming” they were – they couldn’t wrap their heads around the idea of Meghan as a titled royal, working full-time for the Firm. Well, now that the Cultural Reset interview is nearing its one-month anniversary, Andrew Morton is here to pretend that he’s got some steaming hot tea… which is just a regurgitation of what H&M said, with a patronizing twist.

The Queen told Meghan Markle she could carry on acting after joining the royal family if she wanted to, Princess Diana’s biographer has claimed. Andrew Morton – who famously penned Princess Diana’s blockbuster biography in 1992 – said Meghan and Harry were given the opportunity ‘to go wherever they pleased’.

The Queen told Meghan she could forge ahead with her Hollywood career – which had seen her most-famously star as paralegal Rachel Zane in drama Suits – if she did not want to ‘embrace royal duties full time’, Mr Morton said. But he feared neither the Duke nor Duchess of Sussex gave the options as much consideration as they should have done.

In the couple’s bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview last month, Prince Harry claimed the royal family suggested Meghan continue to act because ‘there was not enough money to pay for her’. He said there were ‘difficult conversations’ about how the Sussexes would contribute to the Firm once they were married, adding: ‘There was some real obvious signs before we even got married that this was going to be really hard.’

Speaking on Royally Obsessed podcast, biographer Mr Morton said: ‘[The Queen] gave them the opportunity to go wherever they please. They were given a degree of latitude. They were told “here are your first class tickets, pick which country you want to go to, we’re going to make you youth ambassadors for the Commonwealth”. In fairness to the royal family, in fairness to the Queen, she did give them that opportunity to go wherever they pleased. And also, they did say to Meghan if you don’t want to embrace royal duties full time please be our guest and continue your acting career. Those opportunities were open to her.’

But he thinks ‘neither of them gave it the thought they should have done’.

In the couple’s extraordinary interview with talk show host Miss Winfrey, Harry said there were ‘difficult conversations’ with his family about the Sussexes’ contributions to the Firm. Harry said: ‘That was right at the beginning, when [Meghan] wasn’t going to get security, when members of my family were suggesting that she carries on acting because there was not enough money to pay for her, and all this sort of stuff.’

[From The Daily Mail]

First of all, I trust Harry’s instincts on this. He understood what the courtiers were really saying, which was along the lines of “you can marry her but we’re not comfortable giving her a title or acknowledging your children as royal or paying for her or protecting her in any way.” It was an early version of the “sink or swim” strategy the palace employed all along. And Harry fought for his wife to be recognized fully by the royal establishment, as we can see, and it was a BIG fight. As for what Morton says… I have no doubt that there were all kinds of “suggestions” from the courtiers about where Harry and Meghan could go and what they should do, because there was an immediate desperation to get H&M out of the country pretty quickly. Morton’s version is that “look at how generous the Queen was, telling them to go to a Commonwealth country.” The real version was Prince William and his advisors constantly plotting to exile H&M.

Also, something I keep thinking about was how often it was the case that the courtiers forced Harry to act as messenger and conduit/filter for Meghan’s instructions. It really doesn’t seem like the courtiers were in any way eager to sit down with Meghan in 2017 or 2018 and really explain what the job would entail, what her role would be or what the actual rules and limitations were. She said as much in the Cultural Reset interview – there were no lessons, no real guidance. Part of that was their attempts to sabotage her, but part of it was just plain old willful incompetence on the part of the palaces.

172496PCN_HarryMeghan012

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

Related stories

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

63 Responses to “Andrew Morton: The Sussexes had ‘the opportunity to go wherever they please’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Cecilia says:

    This is obvious BS because if they queen had no issue with meghan working while being a royal, why was being “half in half out” such an issue and denied?

    The “she should continue acting” was harry’s family telling him “we won’t welcome her”. Except harry (and meghan tbh) are sometimes a bit naïve and try to see the good in people.

    • Myra says:

      I was about to type exactly that. There is no way that this would have been an ideal option. This was to keep Meghan out of the palace, not give her the title of princess and not accept her as a legitimate royal. This is undeniable proof of their racism and they are bragging about it?

      • Snuffles says:

        They probably thought it was a fabulous “solution” to their “problems” and were shocked that they didn’t go for it.

      • Cecilia says:

        They are confirming what meghan and harry said and waving that racism flag except they try to put a positive spin to it. I hope andrew morton didn’t pull a muscle after this reach.

      • JT says:

        I should’ve read the comments before I made one, as I said the same down below. Lol.

    • MsIam says:

      I think the issue was Harry being “half-in half-out”, not Meghan. They didn’t give a damn about her and they would have loved it if she was gone to LA or Canada or wherever most of the time. Not Harry though, that’s what they were pissed about. I think though if this was really true about how they were fine with Meghan going back to acting, there wouldn’t have been all of the complaining about Meghan still having her lawyer, manager, PR firm etc.

      • Cecilia says:

        If they were fine with meghan having a job, sussexit wouldn’t have been such a crying fit. This is some serious nonsense. Even for the royal rota.

      • Louise177 says:

        @Msiam: Harry being half in/out as an issue makes sense. Especially since she and critics keep saying TQ is all about duty. The black woman doesn’t matter but a Royal prince can’t lower himself like that.

    • Exactly CECILIA. I was just going to bring up that little fly in the ointment….acting would be half in! Why has the Firm spent a year tearing their hair out over the Sussexes finding their own path when — supposedly— they were told to find their own path from the get go? As to Morton, Diana picked him to release her TAPED interviews in book form and claim as his own because he was a thirsty royal reporter who saw that playing her game would make his career. He got a lot of press for writing a bio of her when all he pretty much did was transcribe her tapes. Well, it worked out for both of them….Diana got the info she wanted out without claiming it as her own at the time and Morton got a worldwide PR boost. What has he done since? Nada….weak, poorly written hack job books that go nowhere. He’s still riding on Diana’s coat tails like he is somehow touched by divine royal insider knowledge.

  2. Lauren says:

    I love how they keep confirming bits and pieces about the interview. First is someone definitely said something about the baby’s asking color, but that wasn’t really racist and now it’s the queen said that Meghan can keep acting, but not because they didn’t want to pay for Meghan. The irony in it all is that Meghan offered more in those two years as a royal than Keen Guevara ever offered in 10 years as a royal. That has to hurt someone, somewhere that Meghan in two years showed how efficiently the work could be done and then said fck it “I don’t need this”.

  3. Snuffles says:

    Just a rehash of the same story. Will and Kate felt threatened and didn’t want Meghan on their turf because she was clearly infinitely better than them at it. So the options were either keep her acting and/or exile them. They’re just pissed Harry and Meghan refused and had their own plans.

    I swear with every story they’re just confirming everything they said and that we suspected.

  4. JT says:

    If they had so much freedom to do what they wanted, than why all of the whining about them stepping back? Why all of the articles talking about H&M being apart of the streamlined royal plans? Why all of the hoopla over them buying their own home and making deals? If Harry and Meghan had as much freedom as he states, they wouldn’t have left in the first place. Hell, the firm would’ve accepted their half-in/half-out suggestion and they certainly wouldn’t still be briefing against them.

    • Cecilia says:

      Andrew morton just gave us the perfect article to tell haters to stop whining about the titles.

  5. equality says:

    So the Queen discussed all this with Morton? Then why does it contradict her own statements about how Meghan fit in and how she wanted Harry and Meghan to stay full time “working” royals? Why would the Queen have assigned them patronages and royal tours if she didn’t want them to represent her? Is Morton saying the Queen lies in her public statements? What would their financing have to do with the Queen anyway? William and Harry’s families are financed by Charles so refusing money would be on Clarence House. And where is the “William can’t do without Harry” thread? If he had left previously he would have been doing without him. They can’t keep their stories straight. I could see the Queen offering a “honeymoon” period before starting royal work but not sending Harry permanently off. Of course, they might have thought Harry would decide to give Meghan up and stick with being a third wheel or they could keep Harry and Meghan would be off working in Canada. This article doesn’t make them look any less racist or like any sort of loving family.

    • Yvette says:

      @equality … What Andrew Morton says about the Queen ‘personally’ offering Harry and Meghan the option of picking any Commonwealth country to live in is contradicted by what Robert Lacey wrote in his book “Battle of Brother,” which is that the ‘send them to a Commonwealth country because they’ve proved they’re brilliant at representing a new, enlightened Royalty’ option didn’t happen because Charles and William (Lacey said Clarence House and Kensington Palace joined forces) had forced a Buckingham Palace coup and gotten rid of Queen Elizabeth’s trusted and level-headed Private Secretary, Christopher Geidt, in favor of a less liberal thinker, Sir Edward Young. Evidently, Meghan and Sir Edward Young disliked each other.

      Robert Lacey (who was sourced by a high level Palace aide and/or Courtier) said that Geidt would have seen the benefit of having a bi-racial Senior Royal in the Family and would have personally sat down with Meghan before the wedding to see what her interests were and how they could fit her into the Firm. But by the time the Queen clued in to what the two Princes and her Aides were up to, it was too late and there was no way for her to bring Geidt back. The ‘sending them to a Commonwealth country’ was what Robert Lacey theorized the Queen ‘should’ have done, but didn’t’.

      And you are absolutely right. If what Andrew Morton says was true the Queen, Charles, and especially William wouldn’t have been so butt-hurt over Harry and Meghan’s request to step back as Senior Royals with a half-in, half-out proposal. The Sussexes were prepared to move to Canada, a Commonwealth country–which would have been close to Meghan’s family and Harry’s family–and would have gotten them away from William and Kate and the rabid British media. If keeping Meghan out of the main spotlight was their goal, you would think the Royals would have gone for the Sussex proposal. They’re making it seem as if the Sussexes dismissed everything offered because they wanted their own way. It just seems like Harry wanted his wife treated like every other Senior Royal’s wife.

      • And, just maybe, Meghan was at a point in her life where she didn’t want to keep acting. Maybe Meghan was at a point in her personal life where she wanted to enlarge her involvement in charitable goals. That was one of the big bonds between Harry and Meghan — their passion for involvement with support communities. So, why would she want to go backwards? The Firm suggesting that she just keep acting, is insulting. Can you imagine them telling Kate she needed to keep working at her parents’ party company or whatever. Who tells a highly educated, intelligent woman these days who she has to be ? Meghan had plenty of scope in her senior royal role to do good and she was very more than willing to work hard in that role.

  6. Sofia says:

    I also think that they (the courtiers and the family) underestimated how popular the Sussexes would be. They probably figured Meghan would get that “new bride” press and it would disappear like it does with the rest of the non heirs. I don’t think Meghan or Harry even knew that they would be /this/ popular/talked about. Heck Charles and/or William probably didn’t know they would go down this route in terms of a smear campaign back in May 2018.

  7. Becks1 says:

    Yeah, I trust Harry’s interpretation, since he was the one actually having these conversations, not Andrew Morton. If he thought that the suggestion she keep acting was a sign of trouble ahead, then I believe him, especially since we now know he was RIGHT. and the fact that her working was tied into not having money to support her, not having money to cover her security – like wtf.

    Anyway we also know that Morton’s interpretation is BS because as noted above, when H&M offered to go half-in half-out, that was shot down.

  8. Pétulia says:

    Sometimes I wonder what would have happened if Harry just said at the very beginning fuck it and give it all up.
    But I’m happy he tried to stand up for her to be recognized by the royal establishment even if it came at a huge prize.

    • Lowrider says:

      The media have been slyly saying Harry abandoned his country, family and way of life. Even after fighting for a spot to stay in the royal nonsense. Remember his speech at the Sentabale dinner. He was left with no options but to pack his family up and step back. Harry has a clear conscience, it’s the royal trash and gutter media that are running wild trying to clean up the asylum.

      Harry and his family are sitting pretty in Cali while the royal trash is hiring crisis managers, diversity czars and leaking to the gutter press.

    • MsIam says:

      I bet he wishes he had done exactly that. But he made that promise to “granny” that he would stick it out and when she gave the ok to marry Meghan I guess he thought that somehow it would work out. I wonder if he realized how much William would turn on him? I guess he thought that if they had the he had the Queen’s blessing on the marriage they would be safe but he quickly found out the reality of that.

      • Pétulia says:

        Yes, in that sense Harry and Meghan were naive they thought once in the fold they were going to be protected.

        William betrayal must really hurt him the most i can’t imagine. With Charles he tries to reason with it because he already knows the flaws in his character.

      • Agree, MISIAM. Meghan wasn’t the only one who wasn’t protected. I don’t think Harry was protected either. I know he loves his granny, but as his Queen she failed him.

  9. Pétulia says:

    Morton is a people’s pleaser he just go with what he thinks the majority will want to hear. He has no integrity. When he realized he’d make more money by bashing Meghan he changed his tune.

  10. Jumpingthesnark says:

    I wonder what is going to happen when they get the real PR people in come early May. Will bizarre interviews like this and the Easter Instagram stop, do you think? I’m inclined to think that this sh!t won’t stop, because of the family dysfunction where they use public interviews to convey certain things to each other. They won’t like peasants coming in and telling them to knock it off and start with message discipline.

  11. RoyalBlue says:

    “…in fairness to the Queen, she did give them that opportunity to go wherever they pleased. And also, they did say to Meghan if you don’t want to embrace royal duties full time please be our guest and continue your acting career. Those opportunities were open to her….”

    Liar. they were told there is no half in half out. Fully discredited in my books.

  12. TheOriginalMia says:

    Ugh…telling Harry the BRF with all the f&cking money in the world to buy Kate 10 million ugly ass duplicate colored coat dresses couldn’t afford to provide for his wife is insulting as hell. Telling Meghan that she can continue working as an actress, when she stated that she was fully committed to her role as a senior royal, says “we don’t want you to represent us”. Trying to ship Harry & Meghan away from the UK, to work and live in the Commonwealth, is nothing more than banishing them from Bitter Isle, only to be trotted out when they need to show they aren’t racists to the Commonwealth nations. The Sussexes would have been their token couple. None of this looks good on the BRF.

  13. lanne says:

    I’ve been saying that the RF should have simply said “It’s us or her” and let him pick “her.” Yes, they would have been called racist. Yes, it would have reflected badly on the RF. But instead, they chose the coward’s way: they wanted to keep their racism but prevent everyone from knowing about it. “We’ll pretend to accept her, then do everything we can to chase her out, and then shrug our shoulders and say she couldn’t handle being a royal.”

    except: Meghan was DAMN GOOD at being a royal, better even than William and Kate. they had another Diana on their hands in terms of someone who could connect with people, work hard, and enhance their global brand. But Racists are gonna racist, and “Operation Get Rid of Meghan” went full steam ahead. They were willing to DAMAGE THEIR OWN BRAND instead of simply, you know, accepting Meghan.

    So now, the BM (tabloid AND mainstream) are addicted to the Sussexes–they can’t mention anything anyone else does without slamming Meghan at the same time. Meghan has sucked all the oxygen out of the royal brand–the RF is now defined by their stance against Meghan. Anything the Cambridges do is discussed in terms of Meghan. Hatred of Meghan is, as far as I can tell, the RF’s only raison d’etre. Which is even more bizarre as Meghan has not set foot on that godforsaken island in over a year. Meghan is no more than a ghostly echo in the UK, and the RF and the BM are still grasping at that echoe, even though Meghan and Harry have long moved on. When Harry and Meghan have their baby, and move forward with their lives, they will continue to do they great work they have both done their entire lives. Their futures are bright and happy and filled with love and hope.

    How long with the BM and the RF keep grasping at their ghosts? What does a Prince Harry-less monarchy stand for? Right now, I have no idea. Royal watching will likely wane without the Sussexes because no one else over there is doing anything worth paying attention to, apparently. It’s a gerontology over there–Charles waiting for his mother to die, his son waiting for him to die. William and Kate seem to spend all their time these days trying to “prove” to the world that they have an amazing perfect wonderful marriage. Instead of, you know, working. Those ratchet rota roaches are going to need to find something else to do with themselves, as there doesn’t seem much to write other than the same old same old. The Repo Man’s gonna be busy in the UK if any of the ratchets went on a buying spree in anticipation of a lifetime of big paychecks on the backs of the Sussexes.

    • MF1 says:

      “Meghan has sucked all the oxygen out of the royal brand–the RF is now defined by their stance against Meghan.”

      This is a really good point. Everything that gets published about the RF these days is actually about their feelings on Meghan. Any ability they had before Meghan to command attention is now gone, which is really, really bad for the future of the monarchy.

      • Bren says:

        The royal family did it to themselves when they used the British media to attack Meghan. Now they can’t reel the press back in because they were the source of every initial story written to attack Meghan. What an out-of-control mess they have created, and they are never getting Harry back to boot.

    • ABritGuest says:

      Nailed it Lanne. Sounds like there was limited support for Harry’s marriage from the start. Was it 2017 that Angela levin had that article about Harry being persuaded by the Queen not to leave & stay to do good? Now I wonder if this was tied to conversations around Meghan.

      I think many in the firm thought (like Sarah Vile articulated over the weekend) that this was a phase for Harry. However when it was clear he was going to marry her then they decided to humour him on the basis that she would just be a ‘degree wife’. Think that’s why they said she could continue acting& not get titles. so she wouldn’t represent the firm and they might have hoped there wouldn’t be children if the relationship crashed and burned.

      I’m assuming the Sussexes made clear they wanted to do royal duties and that’s when she had to give up Suits& her outside interests like the UN. Perhaps knowing their reservations (my guess is Meghan found out about colour comments much later) I think that’s why Meghan went out to show her work and her worth by doing most engagements as a fiancé and doing the cookbook early on& trying to do lots of engagements in Oceana. But sadly the cookbook and then the Oceana tour actually upset certain people. Plus the baby announcement. So think nasty press went into overdrive to make her leave with her baby. Without title etc they could probably pretend he didn’t exist. Then Harry could start again with his real wife an Anabelle or Henrietta – the type of wife Robert Lacey said the firm was expecting for Harry.

      Remember in 2016/17 William& Harry were still on the same page re keeping the press at bay. William even talked about not letting the press in too much in that 2017 Diana documentary. And the Cambridges only became full time working royals then and some key staff like Simon Case joined then. So whilst Harry might have known William wasn’t a fan of Meghan’s not sure he could have anticipated how the previously press shy Will could be part of weaponising the press against his family. Think that’s where the rift comes from

      • lanne says:

        I find it absolutely grotesque how little they see Harry as an actual human being with agency over his own life. I wouldn’t wish the RF on anybody. He really has been most vilely and underdeservedly mistreated.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        “Think that’s why they said she could continue acting& not get titles.”

        I do not understand this as any style & title Harry was born with or received would be shared by Meghan as his wife. As discussed by Queen Victoria, Winston Churchill, Stanley Baldwin, and many others throughout history, there is NO such thing as morganatic marriage in the UK. A woman, by law, acquires the status of her husband upon legal marriage.

  14. Amy says:

    The other thought I had about using Harry as the conduit in place of having conversations with Meghan (and forgive me if this has been said already) is that it was another way to try and put them against each other. Someone less secure in herself and her relationship than Meghan could have seen Harry relating these conversations and wondered how true they were, or why he wasn’t “fighting harder” or something along those lines. Not the best example but I think it was more than just plain incompetence. I feel like they were using him to try and push an outcome that clearly didn’t and wasn’t going to happen.

  15. Amy Bee says:

    It’s clear the Royal Family did not want Meghan to be part of the family and believed that Harry was going through a phase that would soon end in divorce with no children. I think there was a lot of concern about the bloodline hence question of the colour of Archie’s skin, the reluctance to lend Meghan any jewellery and a concerted effort was made to get her out of the family very early on. It’s also obvious that Meghan was treated differently to others who had married into the family. I’m sure Harry had a number of discussions about the fact Meghan was not getting the same privileges as other Royal women.

    • Lila says:

      It’s exactly that. IMO, they freaked out after the Australian tour not just because they saw she was an absolute star, but also because they it hit them that the newest family member would be Meghan’s child. I think the press (also encouraged by the Palace) kept mentioning her age over and over again because the expectation was that she would have trouble conceiving and the marriage would end with no children.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      “It’s clear the Royal Family did not want Meghan to be part of the family”

      Then why did they just not tell Harry in the very beginning that you cannot marry Ms. Markle and remain a working British Royal. They said to Edward VIII and Princess Margaret so not saying it to Harry makes no sense to me.

      There has to be a whole lot more to this story than we know or could even imagine.

      • ABritGuest says:

        @baytampabay- There were a few articles last year saying the Sussexes were told Meghan could keep on acting & they could live without titles to give them more ‘freedom’. I’m assuming this refers to the ducal title& others Harry was gifted on marriage.

        As for why they didn’t just say no to the marriage outright- I don’t think it’s that complicated. what grounds for denying Harry re Meghan that wouldn’t make them look obviously racist? On paper her background with the UN&other charity work should have been perfect for them.

        Her divorce& perhaps steamy love scenes might have been main hiccups but after divorcee Camilla was able to marry in & may be queen one day, that excuse was a no go. And don’t think acting in love scenes could have been valid reason in 2018. So better to pretend they supported the marriage & get points for looking modern& then collude with the press to drive her out so problem looked like it was her not them.

        Plus maybe the queen-the person Harry was meant to get permission from, wasn’t opposed to the union& the problem was others within the firm. Wasn’t there talk of suspicious courtiers whispering in Will’s ears to have a talk with Harry about it?

        Finally they might have thought Harry would walk away if he wasn’t permitted to marry her so they indulged him as they thought it would just be a phase& the marriage short lived.

  16. Gk says:

    Notice Morton isn’t saying anything about security or money. Sure the royal family said M could do anything but without security, money or Harry….
    And she did go ahead and is doing her own thing without security/ money but taking Harry!

  17. Feebee says:

    There is no world in which the Firm would have coped with Meghan continuing her acting career even if that is what she wanted to do. The would be drama around everything and I can imagine they’d having thoughts about every aspect of every role. I mean can you imagine?! And the tabloids would make it near impossible for her to work under that scrutiny.

    It’s all part of the smokescreen that has been established. They didn’t want her to join the family. Didn’t want her in the Firm. Had absolutely no intention of making anything of the potential she brought. And that would have been liveable with but they had to try to exile them and they completely underestimated Harry.

    • Bren says:

      The revelation that the firm wanted Meghan to continue acting due to the lack of finances brings me back to that weird story that came out before or shortly after the engagement announcement about Meghan being shortlisted for a Bond girl role. At the time everyone thought it was Meghan creating PR for herself, but after learning that the family wanted her to continue acting, I think that story was made up and leaked by the firm. They were desperate for Meghan to not join the family.

      The Oprah interview continues to make me question sources and reasoning behind a lot of the stories written about Meghan before and after the wedding.

      • lanne says:

        Oh, I remember that story! That has Palace written all over it. It would be a great way to get Meghan out of the picture–she’s off filming somewhere, she’s doing love scenes with James Bond (and they get the slut shaming bonus!), and then she gets panned by the critics and called not royal. I can see those ratchets slavering at the mouth ready to do battle with their poison pens. They could buy a summer home just on the earnings from their pans of the film alone: Slut shame AND take down Meghan at the same time! Harry would DEFINITELY have to divorce her then!!!

      • Bren says:

        I now think the firm put that lame story out there to see if it would generate potential acting work for Meghan in an attempt to entice her back into acting. The story was a reach and it came out of nowhere, especially since Meghan was a cable TV actress. The firm was hoping for Meghan to continue acting so it would slow down the relationship, and it could be used to smear her without admitting that they are out-and-out racist.

      • Exactly. Maybe the Firm thought Meghan would be like Grace Kelley. Grace married a prince and ended up with a nasty, disloyal frog and desperately wanted to go back to acting. Maybe they thought if they could get her a job as a Bond girl she’d dump Harry for ‘bigger’ acting pastures. Meghan married a Prince who deeply loved her and was more than willing to do good work with him. The Firm just never saw or wanted to know Meghan. Geeze, all they had to do was google her work with the UN and charitable groups to know that she was already putting much more of her time in to support initiatives. Bunch of 🤡🤡🤡.

  18. Over it says:

    Well if petty Betty was so understanding and willing to let Megs continue to live her life her way, then why the big F—-ing meltdown when Harry decided to take his family and leave.? Could it be that Megs was never wanted or welcome. They were just doing all they could as 3 courts to get her away from and out of Harry life. We see you palaces and Andrew.

  19. Wow says:

    “And she did go ahead and is doing her own thing without security/ money but taking Harry!”

    ^^^ that part! :)

  20. molly says:

    I enjoy the Royally Obsessed podcast, and I appreciate Andrew Morton for capturing the Diana tapes, but I listened to one sentence of his interview, and I was OUT. It was clear where he was going, and I’m not interested in something trying to argue semantics and minor details while ignoring Meghan’s very clear message about what she felt and what she experienced.

  21. aquarius64 says:

    It’s obvious courtiers and certain family members that Meghan should be nothing more than Harry’s new fling. African American, divorced with a white family that is the epitome of trailer trash. All at first blush disqualified Meghan as a royal bride. But the queen gave consent .

    • BayTampaBay says:

      Again, I must ask, why did QEII give her consent?

      • FicklePickle says:

        I think they were worried that if they just said no that Harry would leave. He’s always been the most publicly vocal about not wanting to be in the royal family and disliking everything that comes with it, and open opposition to one’s life choices does tend to make a person dig in their heels a bit more. The Firm and the family do tend to speak about Harry as though he were some stroppy teen spitefully continuing to do something he KNOWS is wrong and doesn’t really want to do anymore purely because his family pointed out it was a bad idea and he doesn’t want to ‘lose’ the argument.

        And there is the public image to worry about, the whole ‘star-crossed lovers’ thing with the BRF as the Big Bad is NOT what they want. It’s kind of funny, but I think the thing they were afraid might happen if they just said no is what actually ended up happening. Harry left the Firm and the country to be with Meghan and live a productive and successful life with her and the kids.

        Anyways, what they seem to have done does tend to track with things that other members have said across the decades, agree face to face to give someone what they want and then work behind their back relentlessly and remorselessly to make sure they never get it. The only one I can remember saying it is the Queen, referring to her relationship with Prince Philip.

  22. Amelie says:

    Even if Meghan had wanted to continue acting, how would have the optics of that announcement worked out? I really can’t see how that would have worked. I realize most of the Queen’s grandchildren and spouses work to some extent. Zara just rides horses all the time (not a real job) and I dunno what her husband does since he’s a retired athlete and the York sisters don’t seem to work full-time. But none of them had super public facing jobs and any movie or show that Meghan would have done would have been made huge news and Lord forbid she do a love scene or something… Her acting choices would have been condemned and considered not proper and it would have gone on and on. She really had no choice but to retire from acting, even if she really had wanted to continue. I really don’t think the Windsors ever told Meghan she should seriously consider continuing her acting career.

    • equality says:

      Zara, and her brother, trade on royal connections to do all sorts of endorsements. Mike TIndall runs some sort of business because he was being ridiculed for taking furlough money.

      • RoyalBlue says:

        @equality those you mention are not senior royals. zara and mike are not HRH. The rules are different for the senior royals whose calendar is put on the court circular.

      • equality says:

        @ RoyalBlue Anne is an HRH and uses her property for equestrian events for profit. Other HRH’s have private income also. My main point was that Amelie seems to think Zara and Mike have no income but they actually do.

      • RoyalBlue says:

        okay. understood. and you are correct, Andrew, Ann and princess blackmoor all had businesses on the side while they were working royals.

  23. Julia K says:

    So now we see the Queens version of “you can’t sit at our table”, the high school cruelty most of us have lived through at least once. The ending wrote itself.

    • lanne says:

      Except in this version, the heroine of the story gets whisked off to Popular Land with the Homecoming King that all the Mean Girls were slavering over. The entire lunch room slow claps as the Mean Girls (ratchets n royals) cry their bitter tears! It’s the ultimate High School Revenge Drama!

  24. The Recluse says:

    The whole “she can keep working” spiel feels like a trap. If she accepted a role that ‘they’ didn’t approve of, they would have ripped into her via the press. It would have been a no-win scenario for Meaghan. And obviously, Harry and Meaghan, among the many other issues, didn’t take that statement seriously or saw it for what it was.

  25. RoyalBlue says:

    And why are they so condescending towards actors/actresses? No wonder the kkkeens received the awkward silence at the BAFTAS in 2019.

  26. blunt talker says:

    They used smoke and mirrors on Harry-All pretense to let Harry have his way or let him think he was having his way-The royal family machine and media would be ready to pounce with insane vigor-Vile reptiles all of them-Piers Morgan just told Billy Bush that some royal family members have contacted him and are glad someone is standing up for the royal family-All in cohoots together.