Did the Queen ‘sign off’ on her aides briefing about Prince Harry & Lilibet’s name?

Queen Elizabeth II places flowers at the grave of the Unknown Warrior in London

If the royal commentators had just said that “in their opinion,” it was somehow, inexplicably rude that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex named their baby Lilibet, I don’t think there would have been a legal issue. It would have been contemptible, no doubt. It would have been bizarrely nasty to attack a couple who just welcomed their daughter into the world. But the Sussexes would not have gotten their lawyers involved if it was just Angela Levin breathing fire on British morning shows about how Harry “disrespected the Queen.” The Sussexes would have just continued to do what they were already doing: telling Omid Scobie and People Magazine that they spoke to the Queen about Lilibet Diana’s name, and that Harry video-conferenced with his granny when they brought the baby home. It would have been simple.

But that’s not what happened. People were really salty inside Buckingham Palace and, I would assume, Clarence House. My theory is still that the Queen did speak to Harry and that they speak quite often, and that the Queen rarely tells her aides and courtiers about it. And because everything about the British monarchy is a complete clownshow, courtiers decided to barge ahead and tell the BBC that Prince Harry obviously “did not consult” the Queen about Lilibet’s name. The Daily Beast points out that “palace sources” have been agitated and trying to make this into a story since Sunday, basically:

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have insisted that they did ask for the queen’s blessing to name their child Lilibet, the monarch’s childhood nickname, after palace sources briefed British journalists that they had made the announcement without getting permission from the queen.

Lawyers acting on behalf of the former royals issued a legal threat after the claim was published by the BBC. A British newspaper source told The Daily Beast that a rare legal warning had gone out to the papers advising them not to repeat the allegation that Harry and Meghan had named their second child after Queen Elizabeth without asking her first.

The Sussexes were prodded into making an official intervention after BBC Radio 4’s flagship breakfast news program said Wednesday on its 6:30 a.m. bulletin that the BBC had been told Harry and Meghan “did not consult the queen about using her childhood nickname Lilibet for their baby… a Buckingham Palace source says she was never asked about it.” The key briefing was apparently given to the BBC’s royal correspondent, Jonny Dymond. Dymond’s report tallied with a report over the weekend in The Times that said that the queen had merely been “informed” about the choice of the name rather than having had her permission explicitly sought.

Indeed, it appears from the couple’s own statement that they only sought the queen’s blessing after the child had been born—having already decided on the name they wanted to give her. The couple’s spokesperson said, “The Duke spoke with his family in advance of the announcement, in fact his grandmother was the first family member he called. During that conversation, he shared their hope of naming their daughter Lilibet in her honor. Had she not been supportive, they would not have used the name.”

Rumors about the queen’s supposed unhappiness with the name have circulated for several days along with stories that the palace was blindsided by the announcement of the birth, as it took more than an hour and a half for Buckingham Palace to issue an official statement of congratulation.

[From The Daily Beast]

So now it’s a semantic argument about the difference between “consulting” versus “seeking permission” versus “asking.” The thing is, the BBC’s initial report was pretty black-and-white: The Sussexes “did not consult the queen about using her childhood nickname Lilibet for their baby… a Buckingham Palace source says she was never asked about it.” This is why Harry’s lawyers at Schillings have issued threats of libel against the BBC. As the Daily Mail noted:

The BBC report on the Palace’s position and Harry’s fiery reaction implies both parties believe they are telling the truth on the issue. It suggests that Harry and Meghan could have informed the Queen of Lilibet’s name before taking Her Majesty’s non-denial as consent. On the other hand, the Palace briefings appear to hint that the Queen felt she was presented with the couple’s decision and asked to rubber stamp it, rather than give permission.

Despite Harry’s strong condemnation of the BBC report about Lilibet today, Buckingham Palace refused to comment on whether the story was true when approached by MailOnline. The aide behind the Palace leak to the BBC is unknown, though it is thought to be a senior official. It’s also unclear if the Queen was aware of the comment, though it is considered almost unprecedented for the monarch not to sign off on quotes from senior officials, even if they are anonymous briefings.

[From The Daily Mail]

“It is considered almost unprecedented for the monarch not to sign off on quotes from senior officials…” Oh. So those same aides are now comfortable throwing the Queen under the bus, huh? They’re saying she implicitly or explicitly signed off on their briefing against the Sussexes, not just this week, but everything in the past four years?

The thing is, I have zero doubt that there are senior palace aides who went to Jonny Dymond at the BBC and poured scorn on Prince Harry for “not asking the Queen.” I legitimately believe that so many of these awful, shady stories begin that way, with palace aides briefing reporters about internal family matters. I can totally understand why Dymond reported it the way he did. The issue isn’t his reporting, it’s the fact that the senior palace aides briefing against the Sussexes had no idea what Harry said or didn’t say to the Queen. Which puts the onus on the Queen to either back her grandson’s version or continue to say nothing and allow her courtiers to run roughshod over her grandson. Which… is very short-sighted by the palace aides. You never want to put your “primary” boss in this position. Anyway, a complete f–king clownshow, but we knew that.

Duke and Duchess os Sussex arrive in New Zealand!

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.

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

106 Responses to “Did the Queen ‘sign off’ on her aides briefing about Prince Harry & Lilibet’s name?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Vivica says:

    Please let there be some dropped receipts. If we are going to do this, let’s REALLY do this. Show them how “American” we can really be.

    • Snazzy says:

      I wonder what those receipts are. Like did they record the zoom call?

      • Snuffles says:

        They probably record all of their zooms for legal protection. People always trying to start shit.

      • Becks1 says:

        I wouldn’t be surprised if they do record their zoom calls, but I can also see Meghan writing emails to “follow up” constantly. “So great talking with you today Betty! We hope you are able to meet Lilibet soon. Glad that you were so happy about her name. Here’s another cute picture of her with Archie. We are over the moon!”

        That’s the best way to do it sometimes IME.

      • TigerMcQueen says:

        @Becks1, yest, I would image that is what they do.

        My work team sometimes collaborates with a person outside of our office who is notorious for wanting to conduct business via phone call (harder to call them out when they screw up if there’s no ‘paper’ trail). So we will text before calling, then follow up with an email recapping everything.

        It’s sad that Harry’s family is so screwed up and the BP is so f****** racist that they feel the need to do that.

      • Sid says:

        It makes sense that they might record some of the zoom calls with QEII so that Lord Archie and Lady Lili would be able to watch them in the future and enjoy seeing their great-grandmother interact with them. My sister is doing that with the video calls between my toddler nephew and elderly dad. I would think especially recording the call where they introduced the queen and the baby would be something to do as a keepsake.

      • Lady D says:

        @Becks1, does the E stand for estimation?

      • Becks1 says:

        @LadyD – IME = In my experience

    • Lily says:

      This dumb ass narrative reveals some interesting insight into Sussexit…

      It shows H&M are fond of the Queen. They’re in contact with her and have a functioning and respectful relationship. It’s not the Queen’s staff that have been leaking ridiculous and harmful anti-H&M stories to the press.

      The main problem, since Meghan appeared on the scene, is Charles and Will.

      I seems the Queen hasn’t had any real power for at least a decade or two, and remains Regent in appearance only.

      I don’t see the next phase of the BRF going well. The woman knew how to handle her shit, but give two men some power and the whole thing implodes due to selfishness, ego, jealousy, rivalry, racism and rose bushes. Typical.

      Charles tried really hard to change his image since the catastrophes of the 80s and 90s. He actually succeeded because we, the world, forgot just how much of a monster he really is. Diana exposed it. Now Harry is too. We are remembering. And Will is just his father’s son.

      • Vivica says:


        1. Did your parents get approval for your name in writing first? I mean it could be what someone has called HM once in the last 95 years.
        2. You are spot on with your analysis.

  2. local russian hill says:

    wow awful. so now this is overshadowing the birth of the baby. it’s disgusting. i’m sure they asked the queen and or informed her. these british journalists need to get off the high horses.

    • Livvers says:

      Not just Lili’s birth, but the rest of her life. Now there will be a constant doubt that her great grandmother did not want this baby/child/teenager/woman to share a name with her.

      • Snuffles says:

        Only with petty, racist royalists. The rest of the world will just know her as Lili.

      • Sid says:

        Normal human beings will just know of her as Lili and go about their lives not caring about the name of a random person they will never know. As Snuffles said, only the racist petty types will care. And frankly, they can all go choke on their hate.

      • MsIam says:

        The only people who would bring this up would be Fox News/ National Enquirer types. Bad eggs all the way around and no one who will have any impact on Lili’s life.

    • Anance says:

      Lillibet is an obscure name. Yet, the bookies received serious money on that name, to the point it was short-listed. So, the name had to be circulating among some in-the-know people. It was not a surprise.

    • It amazes me how desperate the Royals and their aides are to die on all these molehills: tights, tiaras, crying, flowers, and now a baby name. Doesn’t the Firm have bigger issues to deal with: Political blowback, racism, bullying, relevancy, money laundering, service to the British people, etc? KAISER is so right, what a clown show they have become.

      • Becks1 says:

        Shouldn’t they be packing Will and Kate for their big Scottish adventure?

      • Lyds says:

        The Cambridges ought to send a Thank You note for the distraction from their Gordon Brown alliance.

        Who knows? Maybe a 95-yr-old monarch enjoys screwing w her aides, the press, and her great-grandson? Maybe she is being purposely nebulous and using this TO distract from “Scott-exit”? I wouldn’t put it past her.

  3. Cat C says:

    I could see them running the name by her the first time around when first pregnant with Archie when the sex wasn’t known. Either way, such a stupid thing to be up in arms over. I sure wish the BRF had exciting news. When’s that pedo getting arrested?

  4. Nomegusta says:

    So petty and pathetic.

  5. Merricat says:

    Burn it down, Harry.

  6. El says:

    It bugs me that they are making a big deal about the conversation occurring after her birth. We had names picked out well in advance, but I have plenty of friends who wait to meet their baby before naming. It may not be the same now, but back in the day one friend’s mom waited a year to name her because the CA deadline for birth certificates (at least for home births) was one year.

    • Becks1 says:

      We did not share our names before the babies were born, mainly bc I just wanted some wiggle room in case I decided to change my mind, but its a very personal choice as to what people share – if they share the sex beforehand (if they find out about it), the name, etc. H&M may not have wanted to share the name with anyone before the birth, even HM.

      • liz says:

        Same. We didn’t know if I was having a boy or a girl and we had two boy’s names and two girl’s names picked out. I didn’t want to make a final decision until the baby was born. I’d also heard my mother’s reaction to my nephew’s name (rude, but only said to me – not to my brother & sister-in-law). I didn’t want to deal with her trying to change my mind, if she didn’t like the name.

  7. Wilma says:

    What would they do with H&M? It’s the only subject that seems to motivate them.

    • taris says:

      agreed. noone gives a shit about anyone in that charisma-averse clownshow of a family. if h&m aren’t attached to an article would anyone even care? they keep going on and on about polls that show that the majority of people on that island don’t care about h&m (allegedly) and yet, they can’t seem to stop having a bloody meltdown over every darn thing h&m do, so maybe they do care???

      and not a single royal reporter can seem to calm the fuck down when it comes to h&m. the sad thing is, though, when people see h&m constantly in the news (through no fault of their own) i’ve noticed they tend to blame the couple (for seeking attention, apparently) even though as meghan has said – ‘we didn’t create this monster machine around us’. the bm has also, sadly, managed to convince some people that privacy = silence; completely distorting everything h&m said when they first left last year. they said they were ‘stepping back’ (not ‘down’ or ‘away’); they never said they were going to live under a rock and never come out; and when their part-time proposal was shut down (by the queen) they then said they were seeking to ‘carve out a new progressive role’, which is exactly what they’ve been doing.


  8. JT says:

    If the Sussexes keep winning lawsuits because of bullshit like the courtiers running amok, than the BM will learn that even they will not be able to trust palace sources either. Especially when it comes to H&M and those courtiers don’t want that. Out all of the “palace source” tomfoolery happening around H&M, this was the most egregious, because it was so obvious from the start. Meg’s MOS case was a bit more subtle, but the battle over little Lili’s name happened in real time. It has exposed the firm to the invisible contract, the lying courtiers, and now it has these RRs questioning the queen’s senility. A complete shitshow. It also has the firm looking like it is controlled by staff and not the other way around. Unbelievable.

    • Cecilia says:

      Did you notice how they keep insisting that the quote by the unnamed palace source is legitimate, but when they asked BP for a request to comment, BP didn’t respond? If that source is legit surely the BP comms team could have confirmed it.

      • Snuffles says:

        Because if they go on record and are proven wrong, they could be sued for libel.

      • JT says:

        You can never really pin down a palace source and what they say. They can’t confirm what was said because the source has no f*cking clue or they’re lying. That’s how I see it. So not even a day later, the press and the palace source are trying to walk back their lies.

  9. BABSORIG says:

    So then the Sussexes will sue, and we’ll get a “palace sources refuse to get involved”, and BBC wanting to avoid a lawsuit and subsequent damages will pull the story and issue a apology/non apology 🙄

    • Audrey says:

      I’m so glad Harry is being proactive with this and fight fire with fire. Tell dumb lies, win stupid prizes

      • Anne Marie says:

        +1 I hope Harry & Meg continue to warn/sue/threaten the British media every single time they try to smear them with a lie. The BM are still under the delusion that they’re untouchable and can lie with impunity. They better start saving every little bitter penny they can get their hands on. More importantly, the public at large won’t let them get away with it. The Telegraph dumped that racist columnist in a hot second after her “Georgina Floydina” comment AND the lawyer she was tweeting with who responded with an equally racist tweet about Lili was let go from the law firm SHE FOUNDED. Businesses aren’t dumb; they know which direction the wind is blowing.

      • goofpuff says:

        @ Anne Marie Really? That’s some good news then.

      • HeatherC says:

        @ Anne Marie…was that lawyer let go or just suspended? Last I heard she was just suspended so she may return quietly without a Twitter account

  10. ThatgirlThere says:

    Utter chaos in the palace and “The Firm.” People have been asking for some time now if the crown will survive when the Queen passes and it just might not!

    I love how chic and sleek Meghan looks in that plaid outfit. She’s such a stunning woman.

  11. SH says:

    For these people what asking the queen means is submitting a request to their committee of clowns that then tells the queen what to do. They’re upset they didn’t get to have their say. Everything comes down to control and how angry it has made them that time after time they can’t control Harry and Meghan.

    • harperc says:

      They can’t even control the queen anymore.

      Harry said that he’s talked to her more in the past year than at any other point. His family was in lockdown and of course the queen was really locked down, so all these evenings at home on the computer with nothing else to do except chat with family.

      And a video call in her private quarters means that the aides can’t block people from talking to her by saying she was unavailable or too busy. The firm may control who she has lunch/tea with, but she can talk whenever on computers without any courtiers knowing anything.

    • Couch potato says:

      Exactly! When they claim the queen wasn’t informed, they mean THEY weren’t informed. Talk about telling on themselves. They’re clearly stating that everytime it’s reported that the queen is sad, disappointed, delighted etc, they’re describing the courtiers feelings and opinions. And, they’re confirming that all the BS “the palace informants” have been feeding the RR ARE approved by a royal!

  12. Cecilia says:

    “Though it is thought to be a senior official”

    “ though it is considered almost unprecedented for the monarch not to sign off on quotes from senior officials”

    In other words, it could have literally been the cleaning lady but they want to make it sound like it was a senior official and that the queen signed of on it.

    Well daily mail, if that was true (that the queen wasn’t asked for permission), the buckingham palace comms team would have responded to your request. The fact that they didn’t seems that harry and meghan were speaking the truth and they simply can’t refute it.

  13. Snuffles says:

    This is what they want. To endlessly argue over the minutiae and get clicks and sell papers. When the fact is almost every female child, grandchild and great grandchild has Elizabeth in their name. There is simply no logical reason why the Queen would be against it. It’s a tempest in a teapot born from racism and hate.

    • Merricat says:

      Yes. They want to make misery of this child’s birth. Despicable.

    • Nic919 says:

      There is a horse named lilibet! I just learned this and yet it is somehow more offensive for a baby human related to lilibet to have that name as opposed to a damn horse!

  14. Sofia says:

    Like I was saying in the other post, it’s possible Edward Young is the aide who went to the BBC. He’s the queen’s Private Secretary and senior enough so the BBC assumes he’s speaking on behalf of the queen and wouldn’t think he’s lying. And the best rota reporters can do is argue over semantics like informed vs asked. If she had any issue with the name, she would have said no.

    PS: it’s been bothering me a bit but Lilibet was never a nickname that Philip exclusively gave her. It was a childhood nickname that came about before Philip even met Elizabeth. It has nothing to do with him in terms of creating the nickname

    • ABritGuest says:

      I think it was Edward Young too- ive been speculating he’s the one who Lacey said hated Meghan & the feeling was mutual. I think on Oprah they mentioned blocking their meeting with Betty when they were scheduled to visit her at Sandringham & seems like her private sec would have power over her schedule. So he would totally be type who would be upset about their direct contact with Betty & not giving any input on name or chance to leak about the birth.

      And now I think of it their issue over name reminds me of Sussex Royal thing & fears name will be linked to any further commercial enterprises like Archie with Archewell. So that’s why they are making this fuss about permission etc – Betty was fine when informed but her staff are mad THEY weren’t

      Jonny Dymond also had a palace source who recently said Meghan had radicalised Harry so this senior royal official sounds like the type that would stir up trouble over a baby’s name.

      And yes this seems like birth certificate gate etc where the palace started something, didn’t expect H&M to respond & then had to put out multiple versions to try cover mess they started.

      • Well, Young is the secretary that Charles and Andrew forced into place. I think Young has a real hard on for Meghan and he is encouraged, aided, and abetted by Charles, William, and Andrew and the rest of that cabal of snakes.

    • ennie says:

      Many, if not all of her European relatives from all over the continent call her “aunt Lilibet”, even Diana from her childhood, and she was practically a neighbor, family friend, receipts behind paywall:

    • Nic919 says:

      The king of Spain calls her aunt lilibet and recently put that in a note of condolence. And there is a damn horse called lilibet!

      This is so crazy. It needs to be shut down.

  15. Over it says:

    If I were Harry and granny didn’t put a stop to this shit soon , I would cut my losses with her . Yes I love her but my wife and my mental health is far more important than trying to keep a relationship with people I am having to do all the heavy lifting for. She could come out and issue one of her rear statements. Yes my grandson asked me I said yes and it slipped my mind to inform my aides. We know she would be covering her staff ass but at least she would look like the loving gran Harry seems to think she is. Me personally still think she is petty and short sighted for letting them attack a baby of color considering she is head of the commonwealth which is made up of predominantly black and brown people.

    • Couch potato says:

      Reading between the lines in what Harry’s said about his grandmother, she probably don’t know about this at all. It’s clear that Charles is the regent in anything but the title. She’s wheeled out for a few occations, and lives in blessful ignorance of most of what’s going on.

  16. Lauren says:

    The Sussex wouldn’t have gotten the lawyers involved unless they had tangible proof that they did have Betty’s full support on the matter and I doubt that they would show the receipts out of respect for her, but if push comes to shove they should air them and get the name of this so-called source and who’s bidding they are doing.

    • Anance says:

      IMO – I would look at Clarence House. This briefing has Charles fingerprints all over it. The BBC has no liability here. They are merely reporting what a senior source told them.

      Rather slick – well, Snr. Courtier, the Holder of the Silver Stick, says that the Queen never gave permission. He’s following Charles’ orders and direction. He remains an anonymous source.

      So, another libel suit to unmask the source, I guess.

      • Yes, but having their lawyers issue the warning to a legitimate new source like the BBC, the Sussexes are legally playing the smart game.

      • LMR says:

        Well then, Charles seems to have embraced his inner Thomas Markle. They are 2 sides of the same coin. Each one of them is a waste of a human life.

  17. Amy Bee says:

    This is just a mess. Besides the racism from the Palace and press and the anger and jealousy on the part of Charles, I think the courtiers needed a story for the press. With Harry and Meghan no longer tied to the Palace, they are under no obligation to coordinate with them on anything. That leaves the courtiers with no news to leak to the press and them unable to fulfill their invisible contract.

    Oh I don’t believe the Queen gave the go ahead to brief the press that was Charles’ doing.

  18. Becks1 says:

    I think Merricat said on the other post that they are parsing this so much its subatomic. So now they’re trying to make it sound like the Queen knew but she wasn’t specifically asked permission so it was disrespectful.

    I named my son after my grandfather and my other son after my father, I did not ask either for permission and both were thrilled. (funny story – my oldest is Baldimort lol and my other grandfather’s name was Henry, so I considered that name for my second son but then was like…omg people will judge me so much lol.)

  19. NCWoman says:

    The queen has been approving royal baby names her entire adult life. She knows how to do it — and she knows how to knock back her own family. She’s done it to her own children multiple times and to Harry and Meghan as well with her unwillingness to accept “half in/half out.” They asked permission, and she gave it. Someone’s angry that she did, and the BBC is trying to appease that someone in the hopes it will rein in the royal anger over how Bashir got his Diana interview, which somehow is more important than what Diana willingly said.

    • Sofia says:

      I can see something like this happening. A courtier (or multiple), a royal (or, again, multiple) or even both mad about the name and ran to the BBC (probably to give it legitimacy). BBC took it because the source to them is senior enough that the BBC thinks they’re telling the truth and they also want to get back into royal favour after the Bashir stuff.

  20. SnowQueenM says:

    I’m really asking… What purpose does any of this serve the BRF? Do they understand how terrible this makes them look?

    They’ve turned the birth of one of their own into a spite-fueled clown show. They are making a mess that they will have a lot of trouble walking back in 5-10 years when the optics finally gel fully against them. Whoever is advising them in these matters should be put on trial for crimes against public and image relations.

    • JT says:

      Who knows, but this whole situation makes them look grossly incompetent and unqualified. There is probably not a single legitimate PR firm who would operate the way the royals do and the situation with Lili Diana is proof of that. All they had to do was be decent and they could have been basking in the glow of this for some time. Hell, that’s all they had to do when H&M got married; they had the best press they’ve had in a while. So what do they do? Run it into the ground. Millions of taxpayer dollars are spent on this family, who are noting more than PR anyway, for what? Everyone needs to be fired but since the royals have backed themselves into a corner with the press and the courtiers, all they can do is take it. Amateurs.

    • Nic919 says:

      Where are the crisis managers? Because this looks so stupid. It’s a baby named after her great grandmother. In normal people world this is viewed as a good thing.

    • Oh-Dear says:

      I know Lainey isn’t well like here but I thought she had an interesting perspective – this whole debate on the name is about identity. Whoever is driving this refuses to allow these kids to be identified as people who belong and are valued in this family.
      They probably would have been mad if the Sussexes picked a name that was a prior Queen’s name too because of this same issue.

      • Becks1 says:

        I think that’s pretty close to the issue. Archie doesnt have a connection to the royal family (the name Archie.) but Lilibet Diana….there is no escaping that. And I think that’s driving someone (many people?) in the palace insane.

    • And ONCE AGAIN they are creating a shitshow around a biracial baby who is a legitimate member of their family. How any of them can stand up and publicly say they are not bullies or racists is beyond belief.

  21. Myra says:

    I’m glad they’re saying this out loud. So now they can all stop pretending that Harry betrayed the family with the Oprah interview since aides have been briefing against the couple from the very beginning. By their own admission, Kensington Palace, Clarence House and Buckingham Palace were given approval by William, Charles and Elisabeth to brief the media against the Sussexes (since 2018). They started it. Harry is simply finishing what they started. As someone said above, burn it all down, Harry.

    • Cecilia says:

      I really wish he would but he’s got a lot of love for that old lady. He won’t do anything until she dies, and even maybe then he still won’t because that man is loyal.

  22. LaraW” says:

    I kind of do think the issue is this dude’s reporting. Instead of focusing on real issues like the palace weaseling out of all kinds of laws and creating exceptions for themselves, therefore literally putting themselves above the law, he went with this piece.

    I get the consistent feeling that in the grand scheme of the UK media, this is all bread and circuses, meant to distract a large portion of the public from things like the clusterf-ck of Brexit, BoJo, covid, Scotland wanting to leave, etc. I wonder if hate crimes are on the rise. Is that being reported? What about the struggles of businesses trying to make it in a post-Brexit world? The monarchy’s ties to Russia. There’s plenty of material to report on with respect to the royal family, but apparently no one has the courage to investigate it.

  23. ModeratelyWealthy says:

    For those who want the Queen to say something, I dont think she will, and is not because she is terrible and is not supportive of Harry and Meghan.

    I think what is happening:
    1) Harry is Charles son. This means he is- was- his direct Boss at the Firm. In companies, the bigger boss will always ask the direct boss about what was going on with n employee. I believe Charles, for whatever reason, was comfortable with the whole situation with the Sussexes yes, and TQ has been known for being a firm believer in “never complain, never explain.” Her son was the first one to complain about personal matters to the whole world- never her.

    2)She is 95 years old. This does not mean she is senile or deaf as Dick journalisst is implying, but age takes a toll. Completely possible she keeps her work schedule to a bare minimum and has been giving Charles more and more to do. A 95 years old still working will not be energetic figure, folks. And she has never been known for being proactive in the first place.

    3) Harry is no longer working for the Firm. TQ is in direct comunication with her grandson. He is no longer her employee. Therefore, Harry does not send an email to her secretary to make an appointment- he calls her and she picks up.

    We know Harry is no longer calling Charles. This whole thing is Charles doing. Hafrry does not work for the Firm anymore and he has a direct access to his grandmother. Everyone else is out of the loop and everyone else is frustrated and letting the worlkd know by using TQ as proxy- PRECISELY because they know TQ would consider such nonsesne ridiculous and, as a firm believer of never complain, never explain, seeing this beneath her ( hint- it is beneath any level headed human being) they are running with it because she will remain silent.

    My conclusion is that TQ will only speak if she is bullied into it. The only one who can do it is Charles. He knows how to press her buttons.

    The Queen had terrible instincts when she was young, she still has terrible insticts now and the people around her know and count on it.

    • Truthiness says:

      Using business terms is a really apt way to put it. I’ve always thought the queen gave Charles complete veto power over the goings on in his family. He is the future king and director of his family. Charles is used to having everything his way, the sun rises and sets on him. If he had not heard the name discussion, well, by God Harry did not truly “get permission.” Since TQ involves Charles in all discussions of his family firm-wise, he gave himself this conceit, and the aides know he has final say. Harry however gets on with his Gran like a house on fire, this was no family firm thing.
      The pic of QEll, Phillip, Doria & Sussexes with Archie – did you see the big @$$ smiles on TQ & Philip? Looking at the 1st biracial royal baby like that tells you the love TQ & Philip have for them, we know their duty smiles and long faces. TQ talks with the Sussexes regularly, it was discussed and you know she is fine with it. Waffles anyone? I hear Meghan makes a mean waffle.

  24. pearlime says:

    I really can’t imagine TQ having phone calls with Harry without at least some aides knowing. As much as I enjoy picturing her with a secret burner stuck to the underside of her corgi’s food bowl, I doubt that she carries a phone on her or that she is able to start a video chat on a laptop by herself.

    • Lola says:

      The aides most likely know about the call. What the aides clearly don’t know about is the CONTENT of the calls. That is what is at issue.

      No one has ever claimed that Harry didn’t call the Queen, they are literally debating the content of the call, and only two people know. The Queen, who has yet to speak on the record, and Harry that was on the other end of the phone.

  25. Snuffles says:

    I predict this will end with someone in the Queen’s orbit getting sacked (retired, re-distributed, etc.) and taking the blame for the “misunderstanding”.

    • Kebbie says:

      I wouldn’t hold your breath on that. No one in that family has done anything to support or defend Harry. Why start now?

  26. C-Shell says:

    What, exactly, is the outcome these cretins are hoping for here? Somewhat rhetorical, but seriously, the infant’s name WILL NOT BE CHANGED. I will always believe that the Queen is pleased that her latest great-granddaughter bears such an endearing name in her honor. Of all the suggestions (sorry I don’t recall which commenter posed this) I’ve read on this fakakta non-story, I buy the one that points out that Betty has compartmentalized H/M/A/L as just family now that they are no longer working royals, that she doesn’t have to brief anyone when she talks to them because she is standing as a grandmother, not a boss, and that naming the baby Lilibet rather than Elizabeth (as all the others have done) is recognition of this new family dynamic. I like that theory. It makes Betty seem a bit more human.

    • Olenna says:

      The outcome these cretins are hoping for has been realized: Public humiliation and disrespect for the Sussexes and their newborn child. They know a nasty, squeaky wheel is heard much more loudly over a smoothly moving one, so they and the BM keep feeding this non-story. I saw several tweets from anti-Meghan trolls saying the baby has only had the name Lilibet a few days, so it should be easy to just change her legal name to Lili or something else. They don’t care what the queen said or wants (see Lil’ Dick P’s tweet claiming the queen is enraged over the name). These people are so filled with racism and spite, they want whatever hateful whim or misfortune that comes to their demented minds to fall upon the Sussexes at the very utterance of their malicious words. The Brits’ public trashing of this couple and their children has been a very sad and disturbing phenomenon to witness, and I will never look at that country in an even remotely favorable light ever again.

  27. TigerMcQueen says:

    LOL at the press acting like TQ has ever had an issue saying no to a name (remember that one of Pedo Andy’s kids was going to be Princess Annabelle until TQ noped that choice).

    If she didn’t want Lili’s official name to be Lilibet, she would have said no, and H&M would have simply called their baby Lili (knowing it was a tribute to her).

    I think a courtier at BP senior enough to think they didn’t have to ask specific permission assumed she wasn’t asked and briefed without TQ’s knowledge. Chuck may or may not have been asked ahead of time. The sheer mess they’ve made in the aftermath highlights that the institution is dysfunctional AF. And the BP is throwing anything they can at the story to make the accusations stick (it was Phillips special name, but it wasn’t, and TQ is hard of hearing and dotty, but oops that’s a bad look, no one calls her that anymore, except they do, it’s disrespectful, but it was fine to give a horse that name…).

    One thing I do know, the crisis comms managers do not seem to be in control. How long before we find out they’ve quit?

  28. Lulu says:

    Despite all that this couple is blessed with (love, money, privilege, children, Health, beauty, success, adoring followers, connections), I would never want to be them. The BRF is like a noose that they will have to wear for the rest of their lives. They can loosen it but will never be able to shake it off. For whatever reason, the institution just won’t leave them alone. Even when the Cambridge kids are grown, the Sussex family will still have to deal with this endless shitshow. They don’t need my pity but I can’t help but feel so sorry for them. The lyrics to Hotel California have never been more true.

    • Legalese says:

      Agreed. The people who complain that they’re “whining” and have no right to speak publicly about their struggles because they’re privileged have a serious empathy problem. I would not want to be Meghan or Harry.

      • MsIam says:

        The same people who say Harry and Meghan are whining are now whining about a baby name. Pot meet kettle.

    • goofpuff says:

      Agree too. Every benefit they have in life that might make me envious is completely wiped out by the mental stress of dealing with a toxic awful family on the world stage with a country’s media trying to smear you everywhere. No thanks. No amount of money or fame is worth that. They are blessed but horribly cursed at the same time.

  29. Serena says:

    BP is really making a fool out of themselves. Nipticking and attacking just for the sake of doing it and bash H&M, while this whole matter it’s so irrelevant that it makes them look even more pathetic.

    Also, I imagine the opposite, aka naming the baby a random name, would have received scorn either way. No matter what they do the salty brits are alwats gonna go at their neck. How dare they breathe.

    The poor baby isn’t even a week old and they’re already creating drama around her. Shameless.

  30. Sara says:

    FFS. It’s a baby’s name. You can name your child whatever you want. You do not need to get permission from your granny/former boss to name your daughter.
    This is the dumbest thing ever. These courtiers are a pathetic, sad bunch. Get a life. Focus on actual work.

  31. Bethany Karger says:

    I think this whole situation is ridiculous. It’s making such a mountain out of a molehill. Why doesn’t the queen just put a quick stop to all of this and tell everyone what the true story is? What purpose does it serve to sit back and watch this horrible display go on? I just don’t understand any of this.

    • Kebbie says:

      I don’t get it either. If she has any knowledge of all this nonsense, the only decent thing to do is to put out a statement that says she was delighted that the baby was named in her honor or at least that she was asked permission. Leaving Harry and Meghan to twist in the wind as her staffers leak these vicious stories is just awful. She’s awful if she’s aware of it and doing nothing.

      It’s one thing for William and Charles not to publicly defend Harry and Meghan because the tabloids no doubt have things they could reveal in retaliation (also because they’re probably behind a lot of the stories.) But the Queen? They’d never attack the Queen. She’s just choosing not to lift a finger.

  32. Legalese says:

    Totally side with H and M, obviously. But I DO think it’s interesting that according to Toya, they didn’t ask the Queen about the name until after Lili was born. This kind of makes me think that she was always going to be called Lili. They probably loved the name Lily and just decided to make her full name Lilibet because it was a nice way to honor the Queen, and convenient given that they were going to call her Lili anyway. And if TQ said no to Lilibet, she would just be Lily. Just a theory, but the fact that they asked TQ so late in the game suggests their hearts weren’t absolutely set on Lilibet.

    • Lady D says:

      They could have asked her when she was pregnant the first time? If it’s a girl we’d like to name her Lilibet. Harry has said he’s always wanted to name a daughter Lilibet.

  33. MsIam says:

    This story is crazy. If the Queen was informed but was too polite to say she didn’t like the fact that that Lilibet would have her nickname (I guess because Lilibet was her great grandchild and not one of her horses) then wouldn’t Harry have to be a mind reader to know she was displeased? I predict that Robert Jobson or one of the more “credible” experts *eye roll* will be trotted out shortly to put an end to this nonsense. And if Angela Kelly or someone else’s “retirement” is announced then we’ll know what’s up.

    • Audrey says:

      Yup. But what’s even more crazier is that a couple is being vilified by naming their baby in honor of her great grandmother??? Let H&M live their lives. Geezus H. Chryzt. These people are beyond obtuse and insane

  34. Queen Meghan’s Hand says:

    Diana said Charles would never be king…
    The courtiers are destroying the monarchy (and monarch) in real-time and I am loving it. God save the Queen.

  35. LW says:

    This is Charles. The courtiers and Charles suck, to be blunt. I know William isn’t perfect and has issues. But I think the big problem in all of this is Charles. His mom is basically queen in name only at this point, but still has a relationship with Harry. And Charles doesn’t. And he’s not happy. We know he’s capable of being a petty a-hole. He did all of this to Diana too. He’s the biggest issue here and Harry all but confirmed it in the interview. I know she’s not popular here, but Meghan literally called Kate “a good person” in the Oprah interview and Harry didn’t say anything terrible about his brother, but he was pretty open about being disappointed with his father. The whole family has issues, but I think Charles is the main part of the problem at this point. It’s impossible for him not to do whatever is petty and vindictive in every situation.

    • Becks1 says:

      So this morning I was all in on the idea that this was charles, but someone here mentioned on one of these posts that the Cambridges were the only ones who did NOT use her full name in their announcement. I had thought it was an attempt to be more personal, but maybe its because they’re really mad that Harry “stole” their thunder by also naming his daughter after the queen and diana? Like Charlotte was supposed to be the princess named after her great-grandmother and late grandmother, now here comes Lilibet Diana – not only named after them, but using the nickname, and I’m already seeing people refer to the baby as Lilibet Diana or Lili Diana way more than I ever see anyone refer to charlotte as “charlotte elizabeth diana.” Now Charlotte is no longer the only granddaughter of Diana, and she’s not the only one carrying Diana’s name.

      As petty and mean spirited as it is, I can see William and Kate being really mad about that.

      Anyway, whether this is coming from Charles or William – I think its clear that one of them is actively driving this. If they weren’t, it would have been shut down by now and the BBC never would have cited a “senior palace official” or whatever.

    • MsIam says:

      It could be Charles or it could be someone who wants to make Charles look bad. Who could that be, I wonder? We know that KP has a history of leaking to the press about the Sussexes, putting out false stories about the Sussexes, setting up fake stunts to make the Sussexes look bad. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck……..

  36. Roseberry says:

    I’ve been seeing on Twitter screenshots of a newspaper report dated 1931 that George V, the queen’s grandfather named one of his horses Lilibet!
    So it’s ok for a horse but not ok for a mixed-race baby….

    • MsIam says:

      Did he ask her permission or just “inform” her? The nerve of that king, such disrespect!

  37. Qtpi says:

    British press should know by now that M And H have ALL the receipts and will not play. They are slow learners.

    Also the palace sources keep making the argument for Harry. Over and over and over. It’s becoming more clear that Harry was always going to be the target for all things negative to keep Will and Charles in a positive light. Harry saw this coming a mile away and fled. Hope he stays here!

  38. aquarius64 says:

    This is ridiculous. This should be a happy time for the Sussexes and the courtiers want to destroy their relationship with the queen. The threat of a lawsuit is telling the rogue courtier and the BBC reporter to put up or shut up. If they go to court the BBC would have to name its informant.

  39. Nivz says:

    Sorry if this has been covered. On 4th June, the sun had an article about the name Lily, as a tribute to the queen. This was definitely leaked but did not get major traction. Also see points above that bookies had odds on the obscure lilibet.

  40. NotSoSimpleTaylor says:

    I think about Harry and Meghan admitting the queen is no longer in control.

    I’m becoming more and more convinced that the queen has no clue about what she signs off on at this point. They just put a piece of paper in front of her and she signs it.

  41. Kitty cat says:

    Is this even an article , because you are gung ho and proving a point. I notice the queen hasn’t confirmed or denied anything. How very interesting. As for them speaking to each other warmly over the phone more than they absolutely have to dont delude yourself. Classic narc moves trashing someone one minute love bombing them the next. If they wanted to honor the queen they could have kept their whiney flaps shut until after her husband died instead in of insulting her work and family in a bid to gain fame while her husband was dying. Really have very little respect for anyone who buys their trash

    • Maria says:

      Hi Piers.

      They didn’t insult her or her husband. They never trashed the Queen.
      You know this, and that’s why you’re upset about them. Keep being mad. They’re in Montecito with their baby named Lilibet Diana who is the great-grandchild of Elizabeth II no matter what you say. Thanks anyway!

    • goofpuff says:

      @Kitty cat Getting mad over a baby name and interviews instead of mad about the pedophile, the traitor, and the embezzler. Obvious where your priorities really are and what kind of person you are. Its not a good look.

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      Kitty cat, are you okay? Sounds like you need a break. Maybe a nice Tartan Disneyland vacation?

  42. Jay says:

    I cannot believe the royal reporters are STILL trying this story. Are they actually picking a fight with Harry and Meghan, begging them to sue in order to get headlines? I honestly wonder at this point.

    And how dumb do the communications staffers at the palace have to be to let this mess go on and on, even going so far as to allow the queen’s competence to be questioned? Unless that’s the bombshell the reporters have been sitting on for so long – that she’s been ill or out of it for years and concealed it rather than stepping down?

    A brand new, healthy baby should be an opportunity to get some actual positive press if they aren’t completely incompetent! Remember how great it was that the queen sent Archie a waffle maker? Put it out that the queen sent a letter or something with her nickname on it of sentimental value for the baby, or that the Cambridge kids have been asking when they can play with baby Lilli. It’s not hard! Clarify the name drama, yes, but put out a lot of nostalgia for the young queen and how she got her nickname to redirect attention back to the crown. You know what you don’t do? You don’t. Get into. a fight. With Oprah! Why are they SO BAD at their jobs???