Yep, Tina Brown basically confirms that Angela Kelly leaked the tiara stories

As I continue to say, Tina Brown’s The Palace Papers is notable not just for what’s been written but what’s being ignored. Sometimes Brown even makes a subtle point and then drops it completely, as if making a conscious effort to not delve deeper. This happens a lot in the chapters about Meghan Markle’s entrance into the royal family and how quickly everyone decided that Meghan didn’t “fit in” with royal life. Remember all of the tiara drama? Those stories came out months after the wedding, and they were absolutely pushed by Angela Kelly. Kelly is the Queen’s dresser and by most accounts, she decided it was her job to ignore Meghan’s requests to use the tiara – the tiara which the Queen had already decided to let her borrow for her wedding – for a “hair trial.” After Kelly rudely blanked Meghan, Harry got involved and bitched out Kelly. This is a notable section about Kelly “rudely stonewalling” Meghan from The Palace Papers:

What’s missing from this account is how fed up, by this time, many Palace aides were with Meghan’s demands and those of her husband. “Meghan would say, ‘I’ll just do whatever you want me to do,’” a source told me, vehemently, “while meanwhile, she eventually got the chapel she wanted, the preacher she wanted, the choir she wanted, the dress she wanted, the tiara she wanted, the candles she wanted, the location for the after-party, the chef, the entertainment, the guest list. No one said no to anything.”

There was a lot of raging, a palace source told me. “In-person shouting in front of other members of staff, basically in front of too many people, which is why it all started to come out and became the first-ever negative piece of coverage about the behavior of the couple.” Meghan got her tiara, but Angela Kelly had made her point.

[From The Palace Papers by Tina Brown]

One, Brown is admitting what we all knew, which is that Angela Kelly was the source of the whole tiara drama anyway. Two, they’re vague about who was shouting, and I believe that’s because it was never Meghan shouting at anyone. Meghan just got blamed for it when Harry told Angela to fix her f–king face and stop snubbing Meghan. Three, that quote about all the things Meghan “got” for the wedding… it was Meghan’s f–king wedding, and she was making decisions about what she wanted for the wedding? Why is this a litany of grudges? “Oh, Meghan got the candles she wanted for her wedding, what a bitch!!” Who thinks like that? I do believe Brown quoted that person accurately because Brown was like “see what Meghan was up against.”

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

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

156 Responses to “Yep, Tina Brown basically confirms that Angela Kelly leaked the tiara stories”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Wilma says:

    I’m not sure if Tina Brown actually knows things or has actual sources. Everything she writes sounds like a rehash.

    • Sumodo1 says:

      Given TB’s time constraints, I believe she employs writers and researchers.

    • Katya says:

      ITAWY! And also why don’t any of these “sourced” writers ever find out what happened to the palace “investigation” of bullying? Ask some people for instance or repeatedly ask their sources and report what happens when they do? It’s been 14 months FCOL.

  2. Zoochy says:

    And this was supposed to make Meghan look bad how?

    • LahdidahBaby says:

      Exactly–what’s so wrong about a bride calling the shots with her own wedding? I seriously doubt this would even be raised if it had been a *different bride.*

    • BeanieBean says:

      I was thinking the same thing, how dare a bride want a wedding the way she wants a wedding? Good grief, these people! And I don’t think Brown’s trying to show what Meghan was up against. I think she’s as deranged as the rest of the rota rats. My god, imagine, getting the candles you want for your wedding! How dare she?

    • Mel P says:

      tinabrown has such a pinched,, “sneaky”,, weasel face…..

  3. Guest says:

    Isn’t a bride supposed to get the things she wants for own damn wedding? I guess cause it was Meghan, she should have just been grateful for being there and taken whatever crap was thrown at her. Those people are scum.

    • May Bench says:

      lI can’t fathom Megham yelling at anyone. She is a thoughtful person and well spoken.

      • Sue E Generis says:

        Please carefully note the construction of the paragraph. No one says Meghan yelled, no one says Meghan demanded. I’ll put money on the fact that Meghan never shouted or had raging fights with anybody or they would have said so and provided details. They said Meghan said she would do whatever they wanted, then they said what Meghan got. Meghan never did anything ontoward.

        Also, who resents someone for getting the details of their wedding that they prefer? And all those things were basic wedding issues – flowers, candles, choir, reception. None of it was over the top, or something that was outside of what the most average of brides would require. And we saw the wedding with our own eyes – there was nothing crazy or extra abut the flowers, candles, choir etc. What are these whiners even saying? Why are they so angry?

        I feel like the actual offense was because Meghan knew her own mind. She wasn’t some dumb, simpering, insecure girl, intimidated by their ‘august’ institution and crawling around begging for people’s approval and advice. She wasn’t impressed by them and they couldn’t handle it.

      • Ashipper says:

        This is what I always think. There is no way in hell she was “demanding” particular tiaras from the queen. What kind of person would do that? It’s all lies.

    • Nivz says:

      She’s entitled to the basic norms that have been set by these same people, and for people to respect her time.

      Let’s not forget how royal brides are commoditised by the media and the country as a whole, so they are depending on her wedding going well for national goodwill or whatever.

  4. ThatsNotOkay says:

    “The choir she wanted.” They all hate Black people.

    • Julia K says:

      Wait wait wait!! Charles chose the choir, reported by more than one source.

    • TIFFANY says:

      “The preacher she wanted”.

      How dare a Black woman would want a Black preacher give a sermon at her wedding, IN FRONT OF THE QUEEN? 😐

      • Giddy says:

        How dare a Black woman__________________. (fill in the blank with whatever)

      • Dara says:

        Tina Brown is a POS. The actual ceremony and vows were officiated by the Archbishop of Canterbury, just like every other royal wedding ever.

        The “preacher” I assume she is referring to is Presiding Bishop Michael Curry, the head of the Episcopal church in the U.S. If I understand my church hierarchy, he is the American equal to the Archbishop of Canterbury. It makes perfect sense he was asked to participate. But I’m going to assume she saw his skin color and concluded that had to be the only reason he was there.

      • L4Frimaire says:

        Agree with @Dara on this. I don’t think Meghan had much if any say in the clergy participating. I think she wouldn’t be aware that much of Curry since she was neither Anglican/Episcopal. Also if he was her choice of preacher, wouldn’t they have had their private vow ceremony with him instead of Archbishop of Canterbury? Meghan probably did say “I’ll do whatever you want”for the big items like venue, clergy, transportation, protocol, guests outside her circle etc., but these people are getting mad about little details like DJs, candles, and the menu. They’re upset she got the dress she wants ( I assume they mean wearing white, hence SIL trolling her in that white dress).They resented every little thing. They didn’t see this as Meghan and Harry’s wedding ( remember “we gave her a huge wedding so she owes us”), but a Royal wedding with her and Harry as props. Hence the resentment of her not getting everything, but getting anything.

      • Sheffaneese Knight says:

        I thought Charles was the one who suggested both the preacher and the choir?

      • aftershocks says:

        ^^ Meghan did not ask for Bishop Curry to participate in her wedding ceremony. She didn’t know him. M&H met Curry for the first time on the day of their wedding. That’s not what is being referenced here by Tina Brown. Meghan & Harry wanted the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, to preside at their wedding, an unusual request for the reason explained below.

        It is the Dean of Windsor, David Connor, who would typically preside at weddings/ royal weddings held at his home church, St. George’s Chapel Windsor. The Archbishop of Canterbury presides at Westminster Abbey. Reportedly, the Queen preferred Harry & Meghan to be married at Westminster Abbey (where she was married; where W&K were married, etc). Harry & Meghan did not wish to be married in London at the larger Westminster Abbey. They desired the smaller church venue in Windsor Great Park, where they had enjoyed spending time together during their courtship.

        While the Dean of Windsor participated in M&H’s wedding ceremony, he did not preside over the giving of vows. The Dean of Windsor did preside at Eugenie’s royal wedding at St. George’s Chapel later in 2018. Another important point: It was Archbishop Welby’s idea to ask Bishop Curry (head of Episcopal Church of America) to give the wedding address, which was unusual. I believe M&H had expected Welby to give the address. But they okayed Welby’s suggestion to ask Curry to participate.

      • aftershocks says:

        @L4frimaire: “… [Meghan] wouldn’t be aware that much of Curry, since she’s neither Anglican/ Episcopal.”

        ^^ Right. The idea and rationale for asking Curry came from Archbishop Welby. However, because Curry is African American and from Chicago, where Meghan attended college, many people assume she knew him. She did not. I doubt M&H have had any further contact with Curry since their wedding, which is the first time they met him.

        I think Rose Hudson-Wilkin, one of the Queen’s former honorary chaplains (and the first WOC to become a Church of England bishop) should have been asked to give the wedding address. Hudson-Wilkin recited prayer verses along with other clergy at M&H’s wedding. It would have been more aptly revolutionary and memorable had Hudson-Wilkin given the wedding address, as a Jamaican-British COE female bishop. At least she has a greater understanding of the logistics of royal wedding ceremonies in the COE, compared to Curry, who rambled on well over the allotted time for a wedding address. Curry might have been better served being asked to recite a prayer.

        A lot of people seem overly protective of Bishop Curry’s role in the ceremony, because they do not realize Curry was not Meghan’s preference. Archbishop Welby had the well-meaning idea to ask Curry due to his status as head of the Episcopal Church of America, plus Welby had heard that Curry was considered to be “a dynamic speaker.” Perhaps Welby was also influenced by the fact that Meghan’s father was raised Episcopalian. However, Meghan grew up in the Protestant church, as her maternal grandfather, Alvin Ragland, was a Baptist minister.

    • Myra says:

      That’s a pretty good sypnosis of the book.

    • Juji says:

      It’s been well publicized that Prince Charles picked the choir.

      • aftershocks says:

        Yes, Prince Charles suggested the Kingdom Choir, as he was familiar with them and how good they are. M&H then approved the choice and contacted the choir leader, and asked if they could work on a rendition of Stand By Me. Since Prince Charles knows a lot about English religious music, he chose many of the musical selections, and he did a great job. It was Prince Harry’s suggestion to ask young cellist, Sheku Kanneh Mason, to perform at their wedding. His cello-playing was divine. Meghan telephoned Mason directly to ask him.

  5. KFG says:

    They expected that the Black woman would be grateful for whatever scraps they threw her and not have any input on her wedding. Wtf. Wow this makes them look even more racist. Is TB aware that the majority of the world isn’t white?

    • FeministYeah says:

      This. Like she should have kissed someone’s boots for getting HER dream wedding.
      Utter racist pieces of shit.

      • aftershocks says:

        ^^ Right. And even then, this wasn’t Meghan’s ‘dream wedding.’ She simply tried to make everything suit her style and taste as best she could, based on the circumstances she was dealt. If Harry was not a British royal prince, Meghan would have more than likely worn a much different dress (similar to her reception dress). Plus, M&H likely would have held their wedding in a completely different, less traditional English venue. They would have most likely invited fewer guests too, so that it could be more intimate.

        Bottom line: Meghan did not fall in love with Harry because he’s a member of the British royal family. She fell in love with him for himself; for his character, for his personality, and for his goals in life, NOT for his princely status.

    • Christine says:

      Yep. They are now so petty, salty, and bitter they are mad at a bride for asking for what she wanted at her own wedding.

  6. Snuffles says:

    Sounds like people were mad got what she wanted for HER wedding despite throwing up every obstacle they could think of to try and derail it. That BITCH! 🙄

    • Lucy says:

      Right? Who is angry, years later, that a woman whose exquisite, joyful wedding was televised, got to make her own choices? How psychotic do you have to be to be enraged by that?

  7. Becks1 says:


    “Meghan would say, ‘I’ll just do whatever you want me to do,’” a source told me, vehemently, “while meanwhile, she eventually got the chapel she wanted, the preacher she wanted, the choir she wanted, the dress she wanted, the tiara she wanted, the candles she wanted, the location for the after-party, the chef, the entertainment, the guest list. No one said no to anything.”

    The two parts of that quote don’t make any sense. “meghan said she would do whatever you want me to do” but then she got the chapel she wanted, the preacher, the choir (didnt Charles recommend the choir?) the tiara……the missing piece there is that someone was telling her she could not have those things, right? I mean I know its all a mess anyway but it sounds like Tina Brown left out an important piece that connects those two thoughts.

    Or, its just about Angela Kelly being petty and bitchy that Meghan AND Harry were getting a lovely wedding and she couldn’t stonewall Meghan the way she was able to do stonewall Kate.

    And this really confirms for me basically what we heard in finding freedom – that Harry intervened to get Meghan her hair trial and had words with Angela Kelly. and then she leaked the story with some tweaks (about Meghan demanding a different tiara etc) to make a point.

    • equality says:

      This statement contradicts the wanting the tiara that Eugenie had chosen story. Wonder if she caught on to that.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      @Becks1 – Have read many many places the selection of this particular choir AND THE CHOICE OF PREACHER all originated with Charles.

      • Harla says:

        @BayTampaBay, I had read that the Archbishop of Canterbury invited Reverend Curry to speak during the wedding service. But either way, someone other than Meghan asked for him but like she said in the Oprah interview, “let’s blame Meg”.

      • aftershocks says:

        @Becks1, @Harla is correct, as I explained upthread. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, had the idea to ask Bishop Curry to give the wedding address. Neither Meghan nor Harry knew Curry before meeting him on their wedding day. I think that’s one of the reasons why choosing Curry to give the address was a misstep, which seemed like a good idea.

        It is much better for a minister, priest, rabbi, etc., who actually know a couple to speak at their wedding. Curry was asked to situate his remarks around the Song of Solomon. He ended up repeating words from the recitation that Diana’s sister, Jane, had already given, when he could have briefly focused on some other theme in the Song of Solomon that has meaningful relevance to M&H.

        Beyond that, Curry was entertaining but he also over-performed. He was giving a sermon more suited to his home church on Easter Sunday. While Curry was well-meaning, he didn’t reference Meghan or Harry directly, except to make a joke when he realized he was rambling on too long.

        The choir got the brunt of it, since they were standing on their feet for over ten minutes waiting for Curry to finish. Fortunately, the choir’s performance saved the moment, but with a more poignant address, specifically centered around M&H, the choir following such remarks would have taken everyone soaring to even greater heights. But unexpected stuff happens at weddings, and it was a beautiful wedding altogether.

    • Nic919 says:

      It’s pretty obvious that Angela Kelly is racist trash who literally brawls at work so she likely just assumed all the black people who showed up were because of Meghan. Rev Curry is the head of the Episcopalian church in the US so he’s not just a random black preacher and it would only make sense that he is invited to the wedding seeing as Meghan had just been confirmed in that religion and is American.

      And if there was shouting it seems pretty clear it was Harry doing this because of the roadblocks. It’s unfortunate that William didn’t care enough to get involved but it doesn’t mean Angela Kelly’s game with the tiara were appropriate.

      Also the racism screams out when this person is begrudging that a bride wants to have input in her own wedding ceremony. No one was bitching about Kate’s scented candles in the Abbey.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        AK is a nasty piece of work and I bet she was on Harry’s mind when he talked about protecting the Queen and making sure she has the right people around her. AK thinks that she’s the Queen’s best friend – during a time when most of the Queen’s old friends are gone. There’s something weird going on and I can understand why Harry is worried. But it would make an interesting subject for a movie.

      • Over it says:

        Exactly, no one told Kate no and put up a fuss. If it were up to Angela Kelly, Meghan would be locked up in the tower never to be heard from again. She didn’t want that woman with black in her touching or wearing the Crown Jewels because you know, black is dirty. That’s what they all think. Meghan was ruining their white family. I despise Angela, and Tina .

      • ABritGuest says:

        A bride dared to have the wedding she wanted! Meghan is the worst EVER!! So ridiculous.

        Ironically doubt H&M did get the wedding they wanted. It was reported in 2017 that they wanted a small wedding but the firm didn’t think that was fitting for Harry’s position. And Meghan said on Oprah that the ceremony was for the world so that’s why they did their private vow exchange.

        It was reported that Charles recommended the choir & the Archbishop of Canterbury suggested Bishop Curry. It’s interesting to see these complaints about the wedding which was acclaimed for being modern & its diversity at the time. Great look for an organisation facing claims about concerns of skin tone etc to have these alleged complaints about one day of having black performers & a black bishop.

      • Steph says:

        I’ve seen comments before about ak brawling. I don’t know the story. Any links?

      • Julia K says:

        Thank you for this hilarious cat fight link. So Angela has a young, married boyfriend. Hmmm.

    • Veda says:

      It is a deception by TB. By putting those two sentences together it seems as though Meghan said she would do as others say and yet pushed everyone to get what she wanted. If you read the second sentence in isolation, all it says is that the decision makers just said ok to Meghan- probably because Meghan was sweet to let them take the call and PC and the Queen liked her. I think the minions hated the fact that Meghan was well liked and got what she politely asked for.

    • pottymouth pup says:

      the reference to Meghan getting the tiara she wanted (along with all the other things she wanted) pretty much proves that the AK story about Meghan demanding to wear the emerald tiara earmarked of Eugenie was utter bullshit spread by AK to make Meghan & Harry look bad

      • aftershocks says:

        ^^ Also, Meghan & Harry did not have much control over the guest list. In part, because of the utter nonsense around Trump not invited (caused by Theresa May), M&H were told they couldn’t invite friends in politics, i.e., the Obamas, and the Trudeaus (Meghan was a friend of Trudeau’s wife, Sophie. And Harry was friendly with the Obamas).

        The whole Trump bs was ridiculous because American presidents are not typically invited to royal weddings. America is not part of the Commonwealth. May was just worried about striking a trade deal due to uncertainty over Brexit, and the unpredictability of Trump and his petty feelings. No U.S. president has any expectation or right to be invited to a royal wedding, and Trump never said anything about wanting to be invited, so it shouldn’t have been an issue.

        With a less public wedding, M&H would have had more freedom over a lot of things, including the guest list, which would have been much smaller than 600 people.

    • nina says:

      And her point is? Please, her stories make no sense sense. These people should just shut the eff up. They can’t even keep their lies straight.

    • Jay says:

      They are SO bitter that Meghan advocated effectively for the wedding she wanted. I’ll bet none of them (courtiers or BP loyalists) have ever done that. We know how this palace deals with anything that doesn’t conform to their very rigid purview – not well!

      They’re stuck in some Edwardian nightmare where things are just “done” or “not done”: all people like Angela Kelly have to make themselves feel better is the satisfaction that comes with crushing someone even newer or lower on the ladder than you. And it’s increasingly clear that many viewed Meghan as beneath them. Thus, the obsession with “teaching Meghan her place” through the only powers available, mostly pettiness and passive aggression. Maybe they find the “I’ll do whatever you want” comment infuriating because it led them to underestimate her. If you are used to dealing with Kate, who I’ll bet AK has given this kind of treatment to before, you might expect to do the same to this nice American tv actress and get away with it.

      Someone like Angela Kelly has little real power in life, but incredible power in one very specific area, so long as she upholds certain rules, many of them unwritten. If someone comes along who not only disregards those rules, but exposes them as pointless, ridiculous even, then it threatens your whole world! Like, if SHE doesn’t have to follow protocol, what the f@ck have I been wasting my life for the last 30 odd years?
      That’s an uncomfortable thought. Easier to put all of your efforts into trying to break down or get rid of the newcomer so things can go back to how they were.

  8. C says:

    Yep. This is where the “What Meghan wants, Meghan gets!!” stories came from. She was planning her wedding like any bride (seriously, I agree with the absurdity at the idea that her getting the decorations and candles and dress and what have you that she wanted is somehow entitled….also them showing their asses in that sentence by admitting the tiara she wore was the one she actually wanted). Harry saw how she was being disrespected and stood up to Kelly and she reacted like the bully that she is.

  9. Lili says:

    i don’t know what they are whinging about, that weding made the BRF look good, and for 5 seconds we were hopeful they wouldnt mess up.

    • Sid says:

      Right? Practically everyone who watched talked about how it seemed like such a joyful event. It made the BRF look good. And freaking Charles got some of the best PR of his life. These people are a bunch of racist, miserable clowns.

    • Selene says:

      And they did! I hated those reactions to the sermon; Zara, Camilla and William were all smirking and being shitty people.

      • Lucy says:

        Selene, I was so shocked by that! Now, with what we know, I’m not, but at the time I couldn’t believe that these adults were acting this way. Not even looking at them as super soft power ambassador, whatever-they’re-sold-as, but just as adults attending a family event, they were unable to be attentive and not shitty in a church service. And they knew they were being televised, and they were still unable to look respectful. I’m mad all over again.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        Yeah. It was shocking how brazenly rude the royals were. I was just sitting there thinking: “these people have NO manners at all and they are comfortable with the entire world knowing that they are a bunch of rude b*tches.”

      • CourtneyB says:

        After SussexIt and the Oprah interview I went back and looked over coverage. One of Meghan’s good friends, actress Janina Javankar (Big Sky) said many of the guests, including her, smiled and laughed throughout. Not because of the sermon but because you could hear the crowd outside cheer, clap and whoop throughout different parts of the ceremony. Not saying the royals (some or all) reacted to that but it’s a possibility.

      • aftershocks says:

        ^^ Yep, @Selene, @Lucy, and @Art Historian, while I think a lot of people were put off by Bishop Curry rambling on too long, most of the attendees didn’t start smirking and laughing inappropriately. I’m glad the reaction by some of the royals is still available in some of the YouTube videos for posterity receipts, because the BBC dvd of the wedding was cleaned up. The BBC completely edited out cutaway shots showing members of the royal family’s rude reactions during Bishop Curry’s remarks (which granted he went on too long, and he did not center on Meghan & Harry when it was their wedding).

    • Nuks says:

      This exactly. They always go back to the wedding as if it were the scene of a crime. Idiots. That was a huge high point especially for Americans-everyone felt close and connected. I don’t understand why they would then turn around and blow it all up.

  10. HeatherC says:

    Wait….she got the tiara she wanted? I thought they were spewing she wanted a different tiara and there was a blow out when she didn’t get it? Now, all along, she got the tiara she wanted, the one she wore in her wedding, and NOT the one Eugenie wore?

    Tinfoil tiara time, (actually it’s all the time for me haha) they were trying to cause division between Harry/Meghan and Eugenie from the beginning it seems.

    • C says:

      Yes! That’s what stood out to me too – they’re admitting her tiara was what she wanted.

    • Becks1 says:

      I don’t know if it was ever said that she wanted the one Eugenie wore, I think that was just speculation bc Meghan was said to have demanded a tiara with emeralds but it was off limits due to “unknown provenance” or something. But that never made sense (bc why would M be shown a tiara she could not wear?) so some speculated that she chose the one Eugenie wore and then Andrew pitched a fit on Eugenie’s behalf, and then Andrew leaked the story.

      but either way now we’re hearing she got the tiara she wanted all along and there was never any issue about it (in terms of choosing it etc.)

      • C says:

        The first story was that she wanted the Vladimir tiara which makes no sense because it’s never loaned and the Queen regularly wears it.

        Then the Mail said she wanted the Greville tiara which wasn’t worn publicly before Eugenie so I have no idea where Meghan would have even gotten the idea of wearing it, even if they were telling the truth.

      • Ginger says:

        The original tiara story never made sense. It’s well known Meghan doesn’t like colored stones so why would she wear an emerald tiara for her wedding? Especially when that color didn’t match her wedding at all? That story just never made sense.

      • Becks1 says:

        @Ginger the only thing about it that makes sense to me is that it came out AFTER Eugenie’s wedding and it specifically referenced an emerald tiara (like Eugenie wore), so from that perspective it was a very well calculated hit job on Meghan, because then it created speculation about drama between M&E and Eugenie’s tiara etc.

        @C the Vladimir tiara story was always stupid bc its well known the BRF does not share tiaras and there is a hierarchy to them. No one wears the Vladimir tiara while the Queen is wearing it and besides, while I think its gorgeous, its not M’s style at ALL.,

      • Nic919 says:

        And they were acting as though Meghan somehow had knowledge of all the tiaras in the royal collection, when that information is hard to find publicly.

      • CourtneyB says:

        The Meghan vs Eugenie story NEVER made sense if only for one reason. NO ONE had that tiara on the speculation lists or had seen it in decades. They had to scramble to find one photo of it when Eugenie wore it. But Meghan or even Harry should’ve known of this long forgotten tiara and wanted it above all. They chose from the tiaras the queen presented, period. If the Grenville had been earmarked for Eugenie it wouldn’t have been an option. It’s not rocket science. Harry and Meghan didn’t stroll around the vaults picking up and discarding tiaras until they settled on one.

    • Alice says:

      Agreed. There was this story and the Megan tried to upstage Eugenie at her own wedding by wearing…a coat. I think someone was angry Eugenie, Megan, and Harry are legitimately close.

    • Christine says:

      HeatherC, I think you are exactly right.

  11. MonMon says:

    How many different ways can the same stories be rehashed, year after year after year? This wedding was Four. Years. Ago. People need to move on. Find a new narrative, new news. It’s out there.

  12. Beana says:

    So this was all about AK-47 thinking that Meghan had gotten her way on HER wedding and decided to make logistics difficult…out of SPITE?

    Can we review how Angela even got the role as the Queen’s dresser? I thought I read that AK was the housekeeper for an ambassador and that the Queen and Philip hired her after their stay with the ambassador, during which AK showed “discretion?” Anyone got the scoop on that? Sounds more like AK has compromat on the family and that has ensured her position, much more than her credentials.

    Isn’t AK also the woman who got in a public fistfight with another Palace employee because AK was sleeping with that woman’s husband?

    But sure, AK needed to teach Meghan her place.

    • equality says:

      The version I just looked up said that AK attacked a maid she thought was sleeping with the married chef AK was having an affair with. The maid may have been entirely innocent in the matter. Supposedly it was kept from the Queen because she was fond of AK. But, sure, H&M are the bullies in the story.

      • Digital Unicorn says:

        I thought it was the wife of the guy she was having an affair with – reported the wife confronted her and a fight broke out, I got the impression that AK-47 started the fight. Reportedly she is NOT well liked with the family as well as within the household but is kept on as TQ likes her.

      • kirk says:

        @Sue E Generis above kindly provided link to NY Post article about Angela Kelly’s physically assaulting other staff member. Apparently physical assault does not constitute ‘bullying’ – behavior which Buckingham Palace considers troubling enough to hire outside law firm to investigate, but only if it is alleged against Meghan.

        Can somebody explain to me why it’s ok for AK to profit off her royal connection, while H&M were denied half-in half-out status because everyone was scared they would profit off royal connection?

    • windyriver says:

      @Beana – that’s the story AK tells in her book published a few years ago. Possibly was working for the Ambassador to Germany or something like that.

    • Tigerlily says:

      @Beana I’ve wondered for years how and why Angela Kelly got to where she is. I suspect there’s a story there. Showed ‘discretion’ can mean many things. She sounds like a total shrew. Hope once Her Maj is gone Chuckles tosses AK out on her arse.

      • Julia K says:

        Wow. First time hearing this. What action has to take place for a person to need to be discreet? Did she see something taboo and kept her lips shut? Or did someone put the moves on her and she was cool about it? She’s got the goods on somebody it would seem. Job security for sure.

      • windyriver says:

        As she tells it, it wasn’t so dramatic. As I mentioned above, the story @Beana refers to is in AK’s book, The Other Side of the Coin. TQ and Philip were in Berlin visiting the British Ambassador to Germany. AK was the housekeeper there. When they were leaving, they asked AK who was visiting next, and AK replied the information was confidential, so she couldn’t tell them (she had signed the Official Secrets Act, yada yada). TQ was impressed with her discretion, and she was later asked to apply for a position as assistant dresser at BP, as AK had wanted to return to the UK after her marriage failed.

        That’s the story she tells anyway. Obviously whatever “discretion” she may have had went out the window some time ago.

      • equality says:

        Wonder if she even knew who was visiting next to tell. She might not have been in the loop until after or just before people arrived.

  13. MsIam says:

    See, this is just flat out lying. The Archbishop is the one who suggested Bishop Curry. Meghan wanted the Dali Lama (allegedly). And Charles was said to be the one who suggested the choir. As for Angela Kelly, she seems pretty despicable through and through and I bet it galled her to have a black woman be able to wear the royal jewels in public, something she would never be able to do. And heaven forbid that a bride have some say in her own wedding, I’m surprised they let Meghan pick her own dress.

    • C says:

      The Dalai Lama thing was a Daily Mail story and I do not believe it at all frankly. Obviously the two admire the Dalai Lama but Meghan knew she was having a Christian wedding in St. George’s Chapel with the head of the Church of England in attendance, why would she ask for the Dalai Lama who is not a Christian to speak during the service? This was just them trying to tie in her love of yoga and make her seem weird and New Age.

    • Petra says:

      Lol at Duchess Meghan (allegedly) wanting the Dali Lama to officiate her wedding. The DM should at least use a believable storyline when writing their made-up story about Duchess Meghan.

      The real truth coming out of TB’s book is that the BRF, the firm, and rota organized a smear campaign against Duchess Meghan for being a grown-ass woman with her own ideas.

      • Christine says:

        Meghan is their worst nightmare, apparently. Meanwhile, crickets on slavery, colonialism, child rape, and racism. Per usual. Long live the queen!

  14. Eurydice says:

    Weird. “Meghan got her tiara” because the Queen let her borrow it. And “behavior of the couple” is a weasel way to imply it was Meghan who was shouting, but if it were the case, then the “source” would have explicitly named Meghan. There’s no way that Meghan, who would be trying to make a good impression before her marriage, would be shouting at palace staff. But Harry, who grew up around those people and outranked them all – I can see him shouting.

    • equality says:

      If H or M had been the one doing the shouting it would have detailed. The vagueness is to imply it was them when it wasn’t. The way it is stated in front of “other members of staff” makes it sound like AK did the shouting. This is like the bullying complaints-vague because they can’t specify exactly anything that was done.

    • TigerMcQueen says:

      That ‘there was shouting’ is suuuuuper vague (just like the ‘bullying’ allegations).

      They I read it, AK shouted in front of too many people after Harry called her out for refusing to let Meghan use the tiara for a hair trial. I think it was AK shouting about “What Meghan wants, Meghan gets!!!!!!!!!” out of deranged anger as soon as the confrontation with Harry was over (not because Harry actually said that, he was probably like, ‘you will do as I say, or I’ll have to intervene with granny’). And because she did so in front of other members of the staff, word eventually got out to staff at KP, and then it somehow (cough) made it to the press. With the negative spin being about H&M, of course, not AK and her racist, bullying behavior.

  15. Jan says:

    If the Sussexes are so bad, why are the BRF copying everything they do.
    After the Invictus Games announced it holding the 2025 games with the First Nation People, tampon is announcing he will meet with them.

    • Jaded says:

      The Queen and Prince Charles have both had a fairly extensive amount of interaction with First Nations on their tours in Canada for many years so he’s not doing this visit just to copy Harry. That being said, this is a sensitive time in Canada for relations with our Indigenous peoples, and apologies and reparations will be a big part of the dialogue. I’m sure Charles, more than any other member of the BRF, is acutely aware that achieving fundamental change for First Nations in Canada must involve a return to the original relationships agreed to in the treaties with the crown because Canada certainly didn’t live up to the obligations it inherited from the Crown.

  16. C says:

    The bitching about candles reminds me of another infuriating detail. How the media wrote stories about how Meghan was disrespectful by calling St. George’s Chapel “musty-smelling” and insisting on Diptyque candles, but I remember that when Kate got married in Westminster Abbey she had Jo Malone candles and air fresheners all over the entire church and the tabloids had nothing but praise.

    • Stacey Dresden says:

      Lol at the gossip that St George’s Chapel is musty!

      This is the stupidest non story, Meghan does not sound bad at all. “She had a formal wedding” is my takeaway. These people are so dull!

  17. Amy Bee says:

    It just sounds like a lot of people at the Palace and in the family tried to make Meghan’s life difficult from the start. This is the real story that Tina should have written about.

  18. Rapunzel says:

    Hear me out on a tin foil tiara theory:
    Is part of this from the Middletons? Did Kate not get what she wanted for her wedding, and she was jealous?

    The way Kate asked William at the wedding if he was haply, I’ve always thought Will or the courtiers made most decisions for Kate’s wedding. I’ve long thought Kate hated how Harry would fight for his wife’s happiness, when her hubby won’t. If Harry helped make sure Meg got her desired wedding, then I see Kate and Carole having sour grapes that Kate’s wedding wasn’t the same.

    Especially the tiara thing. I think Kate hated Meg got a nicer tiara. Not respecting the hierarchy, no?

    • Amy Bee says:

      @Rapunzel: No doubt Kate had no say in how her wedding would be. She let the Palace run the whole thing. That would spark some jealousy in her and maybe that was the real story behind Kate making Meghan cry.

      • C says:

        I don’t know. I remember when they got married, Kate planned most of it (William didn’t really have any input except his groom’s cake). Including those ugly trees in the Abbey. The laceworkers at Hampton Court worked on her gown by her request.
        But yes, William was not involved and Kate had to submit if anyone like Angela Kelly lorded it over her.

      • Rapunzel says:

        C- Kate doing planning doesn’t mean she didn’t capitulate to higher ups and forgo what she wanted.

        And Will did not help plan- he didn’t even attend the rehearsal, iirc, but her asking if he was happy shows she planned the wedding with pleasing him in mind, not herself.

      • C says:

        Oh absolutely! I’m just saying I don’t think they ran all of it. I doubt they cared much because she wasn’t biracial, American, and was eager to fit in, not really do things her way.
        I remember him not attending the rehearsal. There was no way he would have stood up for her to Kelly when Kelly also made Kate practice with a plastic tiara.

      • Christine says:

        Plastic tiara? There is nothing in this about a plastic tiara, please explain!

      • C says:

        Kate’s stylist told the media around the time of the wedding that he had to use a plastic tiara from Claire’s to practice Kate’s wedding hair with.

    • Jais says:

      That makes a lot of sense.

    • harpervalleypta says:

      Hmmm, your tin foil theory makes some sense.

      It would explain the 2 statements that seem to be contradictory: “Meghan said I’ll do whatever you want” and “She got everything she wanted.”

      If the previous Big Wedding had a bride marrying into The Royal Family who just basically sat there and did what she was told while the courtiers and FFK designed the wedding around her, having to “deal” with a woman who actually had *gasp* opinions about her own wedding would be galling, wouldn’t it?

      In their eyes, if DoC had done what she was told, then a POC, divorced, American actress who was far less deserving of entering The Family than Kate should have Known Her Place and just sat there while the courtiers did their thing.

    • Nic919 says:

      The Middletons are behind a lot of the stories but I think the tiara stuff is distinctly AK 47. Kate did manage to decorate the Abbey the way she wanted and so outside of AK47 playing games with the hair trial with kate as well, I don’t think kate can say she didn’t get everything else that she wanted.

    • ArtHistorian says:

      Don’t underestimate the power of racism. These royal aides don’t get paid much, they are told that simply working for the BRF is an honour in itself. And then they suddenly have to defer to a woman they deem inferior because she’s not white. I bet there were a lot of sour grapes – and it doesn’t seem like the royal households are well-run and that certain staff gets way too much leeway because they are deemed a favourite of the Queen. (Like no one telling the Queen that her dresser physically assaulted another member of staff!!!).

      I suspect that there’s a lot of weird entitlement among long-time staff – add to that the general unexamined racism of Europe and we have a situation where these people felt perfectly entitled to throw up roadblocks for Meghan. I do think that AK pulled a similar trick with Kate at her wedding (motivated by classism) – she had to do a hair test with a plastic tiara – only Will didn’t have Kate’s back.

      • Becks1 says:

        I think the Kate/tiara thing was part of this whole drama too. Like AK was probably thinking, “well the white fiancee didn’t have a problem with this and the FFK didn’t have a problem with this so why is the black actress putting up such a fuss???”
        When the truth was despite what we think about Kate, AK was 100% in the wrong for not letting her do a trial run with her tiara AND William was wrong for not backing her up. but i think that just further emboldened AK.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        Yeah. AK was emboldened by the fact that she’s gotten away with a lot of toxic shit. She ought to have been fired immediately after physically assaulting another member of staff. I’m still absolutely gobsmacked by the fact that not only did she keep her job but that no one told the Queen about the episode. Like, a person who’s around the Monarch all the time is violent and no one thinks that this person shouldn’t be around the Monarch all the time? BP honestly sound like it is just as toxic a workplace as KP.

      • Nic919 says:

        @becks1 I agree that AK getting away with that stunt for Kate emboldened her to do it to Meghan and then act outraged that she was challenged.

    • B says:

      Mantel once wrote that Kate’s persona was designed by a committee. Time has proven she was right. I think K’s mother, the courtiers, and the BRF got the Wedding they wanted and Kate was just grateful to be in the room. So imagine her shock when Meghan had no problem smiling, conversing, and organizing what she wanted for her wedding because she wasn’t intimidated. I’m sure there was resentment towards that and that Harry backed Meghan up and wouldn’t let the staff and servants bully her. I too get the feeling that “commoner” Kate was bullied by the servants and agree that its doubtful Willy stood in the gap for her like Harry did for Meghan.

      Whether it was the staff, servants, or courtiers it feels like all the support people were insanely eager to get the chance to bully Meghan and “put her in her place”. They wanted to show her so badly they were the gate keepers, the true powers that be, and that the little black cable actress was nothing compared to them. They failed and years later they are still furious they couldn’t stop her from getting what she wanted… her own wedding.

  19. Mslove says:

    Why didn’t the queen put AK in her place? AK acts this way because the queen let’s her.

    • C says:

      I get major Queen Anne/Abigail Masham vibes from their friendship (not physical like in The Favourite but yeah).

    • ArtHistorian says:

      Because the Queen is a weak leader.

    • Kalana says:

      The Queen lacks empathy. She’s shown that over and over again. She was raised to think about her position, not other people. Her whole life has had hundreds of people whose lives revolved around her.

      AK amuses the Queen. AK stays.

  20. Red Weather Tiger says:

    HOW DARE SHE have what she wants at her own wedding! The nerve of some people! She should have been happy with whatever crappy locations, chef, and candles the palace decided she deserved!

  21. Ginger says:

    So, was KP supposed to pick out Meghan’s dress? This doesn’t make sense. A bride picks out the venue, the flower, the candles, music, food, etc…
    They really set Meghan up to fail my God. She was horrible for planning her wedding.

    Also, good to have confirmation that Meghan picked out the tiara she wanted and not an emerald tiara like the tabloids stated.

  22. AmelieOriginal says:

    Wasn’t there also a stupid story about Meghan wanting air fresheners sprayed in St. George’s Chapel before the wedding? I’ll blame Angela Kelly for that too. I’m surprised Tina Brown hasn’t brought that story out of storage. Or maybe she does, I’m not reading her book!

    Also where does Angela Kelly think she’s going when the Queen dies? Maybe she’s super chummy with Charles, I have no idea. But I can’t see Camilla using her services whenever she becomes Queen. I’m sure someone will be Camilla’s official dresser but I doubt Camilla will want to use someone who was the Queen’s closest confidante for 20+ years. I can see Angela Kelly riding her “I was the Queen’s closest friend” train until the day she dies, we’ll see her in documentaries about the Queen forever. But I think she’s out once Elizabeth is no longer around.

    • MsIam says:

      I read that Charles hates her so I bet she’s out once the queen goes. My theory is that is why she was allowed to write her book, doing some padding of her pension before retirement.

      • Becks1 says:

        I’ve read that as well. I think she’s gone, Charles isnt going to stand for a gatekeeper between Camilla and the jewels.

    • Kalana says:

      In Charles household, Camilla’s the only one running around drinking gin! AK is not needed.

  23. SH says:

    That wedding was the best piece of PR the Royals ever got. If Meghan isn’t making the choices you get one of the recent Royal tours instead of how Harry and Meghan’s South African tour was conducted. I can imagine how unsettled the racist palace staffers were that a black American was speaking in St. George’s Chapel during a Royal wedding.

    • MF says:

      Yup. Remember when the RF were openly snicking at the Black minister during the wedding? These people are racist trash, every single last one of them.

  24. ceb says:

    it’s almost fascinating to see the negative meghan spin even being used for fucking “woman plans own wedding”. like no matter how terrible i imagine the royal family/people around them to be they manage to outdo themselves, who would give this quote and think it would make meghan look bad?

  25. Connie says:

    These isn’t going to end well. The mudslinging is at an all time high. The hatred of this couple from the family and British press is ugly and a damn shame. Something is going on. Who bullies people publicly for 5 years it’s crazy. There’s something that family is hiding!

    • MF says:

      It’s very obvious that the mudslinging and bullying is a reaction stemming from fear. What is the RF afraid of? Hmmmm.

  26. Elsa says:

    I thought the wedding was perfect. Meghan was stunning and looked happy. Her dresses were so beautiful. AK sounds nasty.

  27. Veda says:

    All the salty writers are just proving the point that the only people telling the truth here are Harry and Meghan. The liars are outing themselves.

  28. Merricat says:

    I am amazed at all these British royalists who are intent on destroying the nation’s global reputation. Lol, nobody thinks you look good.

  29. Mrs. Smith says:

    Sounds like there was a lot of in-person shouting at staff…by other staff. Like Harry personally intervened to get Kelly to bring the tiara over, which sent AK into a tizzy (how dare he make a demand on behalf of Meg) and then all the yelling started. TB couches this timeline so carefully and opaquely that it tells the truth between the lines without burning her bridge with the source. Unless you’ve followed the story closely from the beginning, an uninformed reader would assume it’s H&M behavior that started it all. It wasn’t. It was Angela Kelly.

  30. Che Che says:

    There’ s still so much petty resentment that a biracial married in had an exquisite wedding despite their desperate interference. Bravo to Harry for the b*tch slapping of Angela Levin- it was my favorite part.

    • Che Che says:

      There’ s still so much petty resentment that a biracial married in had an exquisite wedding despite their desperate interference. Bravo to Harry for the b*tch slapping of Angela Kelly- it was my favorite part.

  31. stagaroni says:

    If Meghan had gotten everything she wanted for her wedding, her father would have acted like a normal adult and would have been there to walk her down the aisle. Instead, she was not only dealing with the stress of the awful Markle clan in the U.S., but those who sought to make her wedding preparation as miserable as humanly possible. She is the picture of courage, although AK and others did their best to break her. They should all be fired for mental cruelty.

  32. molly says:

    All that dramz last week about Harry’s concern for the people around the queen: “Is he talking about William? Andrew? The courtiers??”

    I honestly hope he was talking about Angela and still furious that she was an inexcusable b*tch to Meghan four years ago.

    • ArtHistorian says:

      That’s what I think too. This woman is a nasty piece of work – and the fact that she presents herself as the ageing Queen’s best “friend” at a time when the Queen actual friends have died off is so gross and manipulative.

  33. Freaky Lizard says:

    I’m halfway through the book and I haven’t even gotten to the Meghan chapters. So far my favorite sections have been about the Queen Mother and the Queen’s first trip to Ireland. There’s a lot of behind the scenes political set up for that trip that I found really interesting.

  34. Over it says:

    Heaven forbid a woman getting married has a say in her own wedding. This just goes to show that from the beginning those basic Bit—ches wanted to control and run every part of Meghan life. Like they never saw her as a person, nope she was an intruder in their ancient palaces of control and abuse,
    Angela Kelly and Tina can both go suck rock. So tired of these bottom feeders and their abuse of Meghan

  35. anotherlily says:

    Angela Kelly is as rough as they come – “an old Scouse bruiser” is one apt description I’ve seen. She was famously involved in a physical fight with a member of the kitchen staff, a younger woman she accused of stealing her boyfriend. She has made herself indispensable to the Queen.

    • HK9 says:

      Now THAT is some tea.😉

    • stagaroni says:

      Exactly! She is a horrible woman. Why is it that the Mail wrote of Kelly, “Mrs Kelly’s position as Her Majesty’s most influential and feared aide was made all too clear following the abrupt departure of a Buckingham Palace maid who is said to have incurred her wrath for forgetting to put the Queen’s hot-water bottle in the royal bed, ” as if it was a point of pride? Where was the investigation into bullying? Colonialism, folks. Meghan never stood a chance.

      • equality says:

        She sounds like a good match for PA. They could argue about what belonged on a bed and precisely when and where.

  36. Leigh says:

    “‘I’ll just do whatever you want me to do,’” a source told me, vehemently, “while meanwhile, she eventually got the chapel she wanted, the preacher she wanted, the choir she wanted, the dress she wanted, the tiara she wanted, the candles she wanted, the location for the after-party, the chef, the entertainment, the guest list. No one said no to anything.””

    I mean what a bitch, how DARE a bride get the things she wants for her WEDDING!

    • BeanieBean says:

      My initial reaction was the same, like, geez, how dare she? How dare a bride want her wedding to be the way she wants it? Then I thought maybe the powers that be made Kate & Will’s wedding plans, and maybe Kate just went along with it? None of that was what she wanted/asked for? I think the crucial bit was Kate not getting the tiara to rehearse with, but Meghan got hers, because Harry intervened. That probably knocked them all for a loop, AK in particular. It’s probably the stuff of legends around the castle halls now.

  37. L4Frimaire says:

    The resentment of Meghan getting everything she wanted is such a tell. We’re talking about planning a major wedding, and people behind the scenes are getting upset because the bride is having input and has veto power. What they resented was the amount of global attention she was getting , which exceeded their place in the hierarchy. Many newspapers in 2028/2019 kept going on about tiaras, air fresheners and food tastings( something about eggs or not having fruitcake). This was also in the scrubbed Kate Tatler article where when going on about the crying over tights, the writer said the Meghan got her way with the girls not wearing tights. I think the logistics of the wedding are more complicated, like the choir and I assume the Bishop Curry was chosen by the clergy involved with him being African American, like Meghsn. She isn’t Anglican so would she even have known of Curry before the wedding? I don’t know what to make if it but there is still a lot of anger towards her, it came on hard and fast. She thought she would be accepted as Harry’s fiancé and didn’t realize she was expected to be passive and take whatever they gave her. I think one thing Brown is accurately portraying in the anger, resentment, jealousy. The biggest complaint of these people was she can’t just come in and change the monarchy. Well she has.

    • kirk says:

      I’ve read that she predominantly went to Episcopalian churches in U.S. Also she got baptized in U.K. before the wedding.

      • L4Frimaire says:

        She seemed to have a general Protestant upbringing and went to Catholic schools. Her dad may have been Episcopal but she wasn’t. Being baptized Anglican just before the wedding but doesn’t necessarily means she knew of the entire Episcopal church hierarchy nor having a say in the clergy, especially since her primary clerical contact was Archbishop of Canterbury. I don’t understand why having the American bishop is construed as her getting her way with the pastor. Do they even say pastor in Episcopal church? It seems Brown is trying to frame it as Meghan was told no, but then got something despite being told no. It doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.

  38. Isabella says:

    What, dear God, should have been done differently? This wedding was a huge success, admired around the world, thanks to Meghan’s careful planning. Good for her and Harry. They pulled it off.

    • L4Frimaire says:

      This is what I wonder. The wedding was really lovely, so what exactly are they griping about? They didn’t like the Black preacher or the choir? Wanted everyone in tights? So sick of all this whining.

  39. Ennie says:

    “The tiara she wanted”, there you go, those Russian or whatever emerald tiara conspirators!
    And ahe got all that and that is bad why? I bet it was what HARRY, you know, the second son of the future king wanted, too.

  40. Flying fish says:

    Charles hired the choir, did he not, if I remember correctly someone from the Choir admitted that Charles’s people reached out to them?
    It was Meghan and Harry’s wedding, why shouldn’t they get what they wanted?

  41. Nivz says:

    She’s entitled to the basic norms that have been set by these same people, and for them to respect her time.

    Let’s not forget how royal brides are commoditised by the media and the country as a whole, so they are depending on her wedding going well for national goodwill or whatever.

  42. CourtneyB says:

    The whole ‘got what she wanted’ pissiness is bizarre.
    They were married at St. George’s just like Eugenie and Peter Phillips amongst that generation plus Edward and Sophie. It’s basically where the non heirs prefer.
    The reception was at Frogmore just like Peter.
    The tiara thing has been gone over.
    Her dress? Nothing unusual there.
    The choir? That was Charles.
    The preacher? That was the AOC.
    The candles? Kate got hers in the Abbey.
    The entertainment? Nothing unusual.
    The guest list? Even if that’s shade on the celebrities most of them were HARRY’S guests.

    Just say what you mean. The uppity WOC didn’t roll over for you, AK.

  43. tamsin says:

    Lord, Angela Kelly sounds like a thug!

  44. Mel P says:

    tinabrown has such a pinched,, sneaky,, “weasel” face…