Sam Kashner denies Tom Bower’s account of Meghan Markle’s 2017 VF cover

Tom Bower’s Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors was widely excerpted and discussed online this weekend, especially in the British tabloid press. I did some coverage on Sunday and Monday too, and I’ve been left with the feeling that Bower has no f–king clue what he’s doing. This isn’t “journalism” and he is making outlandish, unverified and false claims in the service of character assassination. I have no idea why his publisher even let this mess go to print.

One of the dumbest stories in Bower’s book was about then-Meghan Markle’s 2017 Vanity Fair cover. At that point, Meghan had been seeing Harry for over a year and everyone knew that they were headed towards an engagement. Meghan spoke on the record about Harry for the first time and… no one on Salt Island freaked out at all, because the palaces knew about it and had given Meghan their blessing. Bower claimed that Meghan was hysterical and freaking out, and he also claimed that VF hated her or something, and that the VF interviewer Sam Kashner couldn’t “verify” all of Meghan’s accounts of her own activism or friendships. Well, Kashner wrote a letter to the Times (which had published excerpts from Bower’s book) and here’s what he said:

Yeah. In Bower’s account, he made it sound like he had spoken to Kashner and Kashner revealed how “pleased” he was that Meghan went on the record about Harry, but that Kashner and VF editors thought Meghan lied about her history of activism and they couldn’t verify any of her claims. Which is all false. I doubt Bower even spoke to Kashner.

The thing is, in Bower’s accounting, Meghan was always “hysterically” and “furiously” calling people to complain about how they treated her or wrote about her, and absolutely none of it rings true. It all reads like Deranger Fiction, the sh-t that those anti-Sussex hate accounts write about Meghan online. One would think that Bower would know better than to, like, use hate accounts as sources?

Cover courtesy of Vanity Fair, additional photos courtesy of WENN.

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

96 Responses to “Sam Kashner denies Tom Bower’s account of Meghan Markle’s 2017 VF cover”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. ArtHistorian says:

    Isn’t writing weird and obvious falsehoods kind of Tow Bower’s brand? He wrote a book on a British politician that was riddled with lies and misrepresentations. I find it astounding that any publisher would touch him with a 10-feet pole after that previous fiasco.

    And it does seem that he has used deranger fiction on the internet as his “inside sources”.

    • Jan says:

      Jeremy Corbin was the politician, the Dailyfail had to pay him damages for the lies from Bowel’s 🐂 book.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        Thanks for the info. I’m just astonished that any publisher would take a chance on a man known for writing libelous “biographies”. He’s a clear-cut liability.

    • PrincessK says:

      Good! Good! Good!
      More of Bower’s lies are unravelling. More to follow I hope.

  2. pottymouthpup says:

    Over the weekend, Bower was also claiming Medhan lied about being friends with Serena Williams, that Williams told Kashner point-blank that she was not friends with Markle, they were “just acquaintances” and that’s why she couldn’t speak to him for his interview

    they just make shit up and run with it, ignoring when the folks they claim to be sources try to correct them

  3. Merricat says:

    If you hold in your heart the kind of hate that racism is grounded in, there’s no bottom to what you will do.

    • BothSidesNow says:

      So well said @ Merricat. It’s very poignant as well as insightful with such a simple statement.

      • HennyO says:

        I have the feeling that the publisher is the man himself. That Fish thing for sure is not a well known /reputable? publisher.

  4. Noki says:

    Bowers style and accounts sound deranged,like he has nothing to lose and he is writing whatever he sees fit.

  5. Alexandria says:

    Can I just write AND publish anything about Chuck and Camilla and just use allegedly, royal sources, courtiers, insiders ?

    • Selene says:

      Yes, you can, this is actually how it works. You can just say that “allegedly”, Camilla was caught ‘powdering’ her nose ━according to sources of course━ and TA-DA!

    • Becks1 says:

      I mean its just so ridiculous at this point. It really is like you can just say whatever you want and as long as you add a “sources say” or “allegedly” you can get away with anything. And if it was just trash writing/journalism that would be one thing, but some of these stories hit the mainstream and people pick up on them.

    • DK says:

      While it sure seems one can apparently write whatever they want if they tack on “sources say,” I also thought Britain had very strong libel laws?
      Am I wrong (totally possible!)?
      If that’s correct, though, how on earth do they get away with this? It seems like his entire book, and the newspapers that published excerpts, would be opening themselves to multiple lawsuits – from multiple people at this point (Meghan, Serena, Vanity Fair, etc.)?

      • Becks1 says:

        That’s where I get confused too. I thought they had stronger libel laws than the US, but I guess we have crap biographies written here too lol.

      • SnoodleDumpling says:

        From what I can determine the UK does have stronger libel laws, but an incredibly toxic cultural attitude towards the idea of legally standing up for yourself when publicly defamed. It’s like some twisted extension of the ‘stiff upper lip’ nonsense that’s been plaguing the nation for a couple centuries now.

        At any rate, no matter how egregious or financially harmful the lies printed about a person, business, or other organization are, there will always be a large and very vocal group (by no means a majority, but still large) that will go absolutely foaming at the mouth mad and howl about ‘over-sensitivity’ and ‘vexatious litigation’ EVEN if it’s the first time you’ve ever sued ANYONE for ANYTHING. After all, everyone knows that only the dreaded Americans ever file lawsuits.

        The tabloid press has a vested interest in discouraging anyone and everyone from thinking that pursuing legal remedies is a good idea…they tend to regard it as a signal to rally around the victim and attack them all the more wildly.

    • BeanieBean says:

      Be sure to sprinkle in a fair amount of ‘it is said that’, ‘it is thought that’, ‘presumably’, and maybe throw in ‘in a clear voice’ for verisimilitude.

  6. Lady Esther says:

    Good that he set the record straight, and to Omid for highlighting it.

    • BeanieBean says:

      I like how Omid noted that Kashner’s response was ‘buried’ in the letters section.

    • BothSidesNow says:

      @ Lady Esther, I am as well. In addition to including the letter which Kashner had written in response for the world to see that Bowles is talking out of his arse……

      But I keep asking myself the same question…..what publisher, in their right mind, given the reputation of Bowels as well as his supposed “sources”, blatant lies, compounded by his litigious history, would actually agree to publish this supposed book? What planet does this publisher live on? Mars perhaps? Are they not reading the same rebuttals that we are reading? I am actually curious who would be willing to place their reputation on the line for this one hack wonder?

      Is this publisher willing to put their name on a book which is potentially a litmus test for how many lawsuits will result in his final publication?? I am dumbfounded…….

      I am open to all comments!!! Please!!!!

      • Lorelei says:

        Maybe he self-published? That’s the only explanation that makes any sense here!

      • BothSidesNow says:

        @ Lorelei, you could be absolutely right!! Though I question if he has that many £££££’s laying about freely to burn.

        I am questioning the ethics as well as the reason why any one on this planet would publish his BS.

      • aftershocks says:

        ^^ Perhaps b/c whoever the publishers are, they are craven creeps too, trolling for a payday. And they don’t care who gets hurt, offended, or slimed, as long as they smell a profit of some kind. Our world today has devolved to this.

  7. Amy Bee says:

    This is just embarrassing. But I’m glad Sam Kashner spoke out about the false claims. I’ll say it everytime the best thing Harry and Meghan ever did was to do that interview with Oprah. Had they remained silent, these false accounts would have been taken as the gospel truth and when Harry brings out his book it’s over for these grifters like Bowers.

    • aftershocks says:

      ^^ Yep, @Amy Bee! M&H had had enough probably by fall 2020 after M’s miscarriage and trying to conceive again, yet still having to deal with fakakta Salty Isle crap. Then, haters, firm and rota jerks further crossed the line and began spewing nonsense about Archie’s birth certificate in early 2021, solely designed to hurt Meg, and by extension, Harry and Archie. At that point, M&H probably phoned Oprah and said, “We’re ready to do an interview. It’s a go!”

      Meg was pregnant again, and surely taking it easy at home in those first months to protect her pregnancy. They wanted to put an end to as much of the nonsense as they could. At the very least, their aim was to send a message: “We aren’t revealing everything at this time. But believe it that we are holding onto all the receipts.”

      During the Oprah interview, Harry also clearly asked them once again to, “Call off the [rota] dogs.” But the scared, desperate response by the firm has been to cozy up to Harmsworth’s DF and other tabloid bottom-feeders, like Angela ‘the self-professed Devil’ Levin, ever more closely.

  8. Tessa says:

    Bower comes off as shrill and desperate much like Samantha did i hope book is a major fail

  9. Sunshineinfiji says:

    Bower got disemboweled.

  10. Lili says:

    Wow, is this the first person to push back on Journalists. This is good news

    • aftershocks says:

      ^^ Well, Sam Kashner is a journalist with a conscience, and at least a modicum of decency and honesty. So, Kashner is a popular culture journalist pushing back on a lousy leech bottom-feeder who has no integrity, forget about good sense and human decency. That’s the difference.

    • PrincessK says:

      Very good news!

  11. GuestWho says:

    I am starting to believe the theory that this book was written to get that man sued for all the attention that would bring him (and his pals in the British “press”).

    It’s nice to see that there are people calling out different aspects of this nonsense. I saw a clip from Jeremy Vine (I think – wasn’t him hosting…) and there was some discussion about how the information from the Etonian Hunting bash fest actually makes Meghan look good for standing up for her principles and makes Harry’s “friends” look racist and out of touch.

    • Snuffles says:

      British tabloids are desperate to get Meghan in court on the stand for “discovery” so they can milk more stories out of her.

    • Alexandria says:

      Someone should push back and simply ask whoever is criticising Meghan about that one “what’s the problem?”. Anyone would find it very difficult to explain the problem without looking like a racist.

    • Polo says:

      Yup it’s part of his history. He’s been sued three or four times. Jeremy Corbyn being his highest profile target to date I believe.
      But Meghan is the biggest of them all. She’s global and with the backing of the right wing press in the UK he would have a field day.
      Remember when Samantha filed her lawsuit the Daily F ail and GB News were so excited only for that to completely fall flat.
      Tom B is worse than that. So yeah obviously Harry and Meghan know best but in my opinion I feel like suing isn’t worth it.

      • GuestWho says:

        I don’t think that M&H will fall into that trap – they will remain silent and dignified. How many copies of this book are going to sell? Aren’t people tired of reading the same crap over and over? I don’t even know how that other woman’s book did…doesn’t seem like it was gangbusters.

      • Petra (Brazen Hussy Uppity Phenomenal Woman) says:

        @Polo, Bowel movement is a known liar. All his books are filled with fabrications done for the sole purpose of a money grabber.

        Check out Stephen Bush’s new statesman article from October 21, 2020.

      • Harper says:

        Bowers is hoping to be sued. He’s basically saying he wrote a book of lies as revenge for H&M calling the royal family racist and sullying the royal image. As if Meghan is a puppet that he can manipulate into court. The ego of this guy, thinking that after all the crap that’s been slung at Meghan, he’ll be the one to take her down. Instead, he just added himself to the list of Meghan’s Magic Karma victims who always seem to eventually get their just desserts.

      • Lorelei says:

        @GuestWho, even if I hated Meghan, I wouldn’t buy this because every single thing in it seems to be crap we’ve already been reading over and over again for years.
        IDK who the market for this is. Because there aren’t as many hardcore Meghan-haters that there might seem to be— it’s just that the ones who are happen to be very loud on places like Twitter.

      • Feeshalori says:

        I wouldn’t read this POS garbage free from the library.

      • kirk says:

        Petra (Brazen Hussy Uppity Phenomenal Woman) –
        Thanks for Stephen Bush, New Statesman cite –
        where we learn TB is not just a gossipy, hate-filled fabulist, but a self-righteous hypocrite. I already decided he’s not worth reading after discovering his 2018 book on Chuck totally missed out on Chuck’s bucks probs (suitcases, honors sales, direct grifting grabs for more bucks (for mummy’s castle)) despite proclaiming himself an “investigative journalist.”

      • aftershocks says:

        @Polo: ” Harry and Meghan know best but in my opinion I feel like suing isn’t worth it.”

        Right @Polo. Anyone with common sense and human decency would not even be interested in reading or giving any credence to this crap, except for panning, and/ or refuting it. The obvious lies and twisted anecdotes are overflowing and will end up sinking this messy turd. No matter how many times it might be necessary to flush it thoroughly down the drain. Good riddance!

        Let’s hope it all falls apart quickly without further clogging, multiplying, and stinking up the rotting sewer system that is deranger-land.

    • The Recluse says:

      I saw that clip of the guy talking about this book. He called it what it was: a hit piece against the Duchess.

  12. C-Shell says:

    Every excerpted anecdote from this drivel has brought out some big receipts and with a quickness. Bless Sam Kashner for his immediate and eloquent refutation of Bowel’s misogyny. If any of these rags, or Bowel, get sued for libel over this shit, it might well come from people like Kashner who are maliciously lied about and tarred by this vile fiction.

  13. Petra (Brazen Hussy Uppity Phenomenal Woman) says:

    I’m in agreement with Benjamin Ryan on Twitter. @benryanwriter “Hating Meghan Markle is a billion dollar industry. It will never stop. Too many people make a living off of it.”

    I hope more supporters of the Sussexes recognised this when we click on negative articles about Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan.

    • Swaz says:

      Racism has always been a lucrative business

    • DK says:

      This is why I appreciate that Celebitchy does the clicking for us and excerpts the articles generously – so I never have to click on the racist hate-spewing ones.

      (Whereas I do always make a point of clicking on the links to Omid Scobie’s full columns and other supportive reports Kaiser alerts us to here. Hoping support for the positive articles will eventually win out!)

      • BothSidesNow says:

        Ditto!!! Celebitchy is willing to take the punches for us, while serving absolutely delicious pictures for dessert as they comb through these piles of lies, hatred, racism as well as misogynistic beating of the drums.

    • kirk says:

      I don’t usually click on stories with screamy headlines, or known tabloidy offenders (incl. Tom Sykes, Jack Royston). However, I really couldn’t stop myself clicking on an interview link with Tom Bower talking on Virgin Radio about his Meghan hit because it was just too fun to watch this dolt relegated to a channel owned by another of his hit pieces, Richard Branson. Wonder if he knows how to spell irony?

  14. Louise177 says:

    I do wonder if Meghan will sue. Based on the excerpts, so much is provable to be false.

    • Ginger says:

      I highly doubt she will. This isn’t the first book full of lies about Meghan and it won’t be the last. She will ignore it like all of the others. These people desperately want her attention and paying them dust is what drives them mad. He wants attention for his book because he knows it won’t sell well, like all of the others.

      • Julia K says:

        If she sues and ends up in a courtroom, his lawyers will have a field day asking her all the questions the Daily Fail has scripted. She will never put herself in that vulnerable a position.

    • ArtHistorian says:

      I think he wants to be sued. So the best strategy would just be to ignore it.

    • Swaz says:

      These pictures of Meghan and Harry in New York don’t look like a couple that’s worried about a book 🫠🫠

    • windyriver says:

      This book is due to be published in two days. It’s available on Amazon UK. Has anyone noticed it doesn’t seem to be on Amazon US? it won’t come up on a search. An audiobook version appears under Royal Biographies, but the listing says it’s no longer available. It also doesn’t come up on the Barnes and Noble website. (I’m not looking to buy it, was just curious about pre-order sales numbers.)

      Very interesting.

      • BeanieBean says:

        I think if it were to be sold on Amazon US & Barnes & Noble, it would need to have an American copyright and maybe no publisher in the US bought the rights. Just guessing, but we do have different copyright laws & that has some bearing on the sales.

      • Not a Subject says:

        It’s been pulled from all US, Canada and Australian sites and will not be released until November. LOL! Apparently it’s going to have a rewrite due to all the inacuracies already found in just the excerpts. TRASH

    • L4Frimaire says:

      Ha ha, busted! Glad the journalist is speaking up because the book excerpt made him look unprofessional and petty. Meghan doesn’t need to give a single thought to this rag, especially with him being discredited and so many receipts refuting just sloppy writing and lies. It seems your basic Twitter user has fact checked this “ novel” more than his actual editors. This “author” has been called out on all the blatant inaccuracies and lies ( he even got the Vogue cover incorrect, listing people who were not on the cover like Joni Mitchell and Dian Fossey). One of the Rota reporters described it as an excellent book, lol. It’s starting to be quite hilarious

    • Lorelei says:

      This book seems too outlandish and stupid to even waste time and $ on a lawsuit. I know it’s what Bower wants, but I doubt Meghan will bother. It’s so blatantly ridiculous.

  15. TIFFANY says:

    Bower came to the attention of Black Twitter, who had nothing but receipts.

    You don’t go after GOAT Serena Williams or Duchess Meghan.

    Tom learned though.

    • GR says:

      @tiffany – that is good to hear! The people profiting off this garbage need to start seeing personal consequences!

  16. Akel says:

    I’m glad he set the record straight though I’m sure those in the British media will report on it..smh

    So I started following Harry and Meghan closely post Oprah interview. I watched suits before so I knew about Meghan and not much about Harry.
    Before Oprah I only saw bits of pieces in the major news channels whenever they did something big like tours, birth, etc.
    I just didn’t have time to pay attention to the daily tabloid mess. I actually didn’t even know that sites like page six or daily mail existed.

    All that to say a large portion of the population are in the same boat. We don’t care about tabloid news. It’s completely separate here in the US versus the Uk it’s all intertwined.

    I have a few friends who love Harry and Meghan as well. I asked them if they knew about the books that have come out and they had no idea what I was talking about. They are just waiting for Harry’s memoir.

    Obviously this is a small group of us but I feel like a large portion of the public isn’t digesting tabloid news about Harry and Meghan. What they see are things like the Mandela speech being reported on ABC news, Washington Post etc. I feel like sometimes it’s easy to look at the tabloid gossip and trolls and be overwhelmed at all the haters.

    But Harry and Meghan have a lot of fans and support. More support than hate. They will never have to beg for money. They haven’t even tapped into the more entertainment side of their life ( commercials, products contracts, tv appearances, etc).

    Despite what these as**oles do or say Meghan are Harry are still winning still thriving.
    Remember that if you get overwhelmed by the lies and haters.

    • Jais says:

      The uk media really is a whole other thing. The times isn’t considered a tabloid there but they had huge articles excerpting this book for days , splashed with Meghan’s face, with no mention of the number of falsehoods. The letter correcting this excerpt was tiny in comparison and in the letters section on pg. 26. A decision could have been made to actually write a column about this letter that carried equivalent weight in the paper, in both size and page number, perhaps with another splash of Meghan’s face. But the times chose not to do that. The bias is real.
      @akel- but thank you for your last paragraph reminding that Harry and Meghan are safe and thriving and to keep in mind when the negative feels overwhelming.

  17. Harper says:

    It’s really a bad look for VF if their writers aren’t discreet about handling their interview subjects. It’s a nice letter, and one gets the feeling that Kashner didn’t appreciate being described as having a stutter if he doesn’t. Now Kashner knows how it feels to get swept up in the British media hate machine.

    • Petra (Brazen Hussy Uppity Phenomenal Woman) says:

      Like every other RR, The Brazen Old Racist that’s “Bowel movement” lied. Kashner had always spoken the truth regarding his interview and photo shoot with Duchess Meghan.

      The quote below is from the interview Sam Kashner had with Gayle King. The video is easy to find on Twitter.

      “She had a genuine warmth. Unstressed elegance about her. Which you pick up right away. “ – Vanity Fair Journalist, Sam Kashner.

  18. NCWoman says:

    OK, wait, so VF couldn’t confirm the early activism story way back in 2017?! The story actually makes sense now. Of course, corporate PR records don’t go back into Meghan’s childhood, so the company would have no institutional memory of it, and that video wasn’t found and released until right before the wedding if I remember correctly. There is no way VF would have been able to independently verify the story back in 2017. That cut would have had no implication that Meghan lied. It was just an editorial requirement due to understandable lack of independent verification. They didn’t have the resources to search local news archives going back 20 years, How did anyone make this a big deal instead of laughing the Bowers guy out the door?

    • equality says:

      Her teacher could have verified it or don’t ordinary citizens count? Her classmates could verify. She was interviewed by Nickelodeon at the time. Quite likely the school would have kept records of something like that. It’s not like they would have to “search” local news archives, they surely would be arranged by date.

      • NCWoman says:

        This wasn’t a research paper or even a hard news article. It was a profile. Unless Meghan provided them in advance with the exact date of the interview, no, they wouldn’t look for it. They would attempt verification with the specific party involved and make the cut since it wasn’t independently verifiable with that specific party. That’s standard procedure. Fact checkers have been slashed everywhere–no way they’d have time to do veer outside of standard procedure for an artist profile. Not verifying doesn’t reflect badly on VF or on Meghan. The only one this reflects badly on is this Bowers guy for trying to turn it into something it definitely wasn’t.

      • Debbie says:

        @equality: Some people are bound and determined to defend sloppy work, lies, and blatant inaccuracies by people who call themselves reporters. Saying that those stories were from too long ago is a cop out. How about just doing an online search, where recently when H & M joined up with Proctor & Gamble for charity, the details of Meghan’s first interactions with the company were retold again.

        Also, if a news medium or storyteller can’t afford to fact check, then they can’t afford to tell the story. They should just get out the business altogether rather than making up things or using inuendo. Further, when someone says that an event reported in a published book (crap though it may be) doesn’t need fact checking because it’s “not hard news or a research paper” it’s only “a profile” – that tells you they don’t care about truth and/or have a strong bias.

    • Bex says:

      Vanity Fair supposedly not having the resources to send a request to Nickelodeon, a major cable broadcaster or a local Los Angeles affiliate (there were fewer in the early 90s than there are today) seems bit of a stretch to me.

      I would be interested in seeing this researcher’s work notes because those outlets certainly managed to drop the videos with relative ease.

    • BeanieBean says:

      Linda Ellerbee is still alive. Shouldn’t have been too hard to contact her.

      • Well Wisher says:

        She actually commented about it around the time of the Sussex nuptials.
        I am sure there is actual tape of her comments.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      NCWoman, it’s interesting the different takes on this issue. When I read Sam’s letter, I assumed that this part of his article was cut from the published one because of the room allocated to the article. I could believe that VF was more interested in what she said about Harry rather than what she has done in the humanitarian arena.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Saucy I thought the same. They went with the more “personal life” parts in an attempt to garner more interest.

  19. ThatsNotOkay says:

    Ok. So Vanity Fair’s fact checkers might have found the P&G proof, but Sam’s editors took it out, for what we reason? Space? Trying to lean more toward the relationship with Harry than toward Meghan as an independent, politically, civically, and activism-minded individual. Fine. Glad Sam mentioned his admiration for Meghan and how Harry is the lucky one, lol! The Salty Ones ain’t gonna like that!

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      That’sNotOkay, I just saw your post. I commented above with the same thought.

  20. W says:

    List of all of Bowels lies so far

    -The Queen was “relieved” about Meghan not coming to the funeral (Buckingham palace briefed journalist over the weekend that they doubt the queen was thinking about anyone else)

    -Vanity Fair Cover Interview (as confirmed by Sam Kashner himself)

    -Serena & Meghan only “acquaintances” (literally a tweet by Serena calling Meghan her friend in 2014)

    -P&G letter (literally a video on NickNews about it)

    -Reitman’s interview (Made up story in the Daily fail + Meghan has shown her feet in photos)

    -Meghan “refused” to call her dad (court case confirmed that she was trying to get in touch with him after his fake heart attack)

    -Meghan “threw tea” at someone in Australia (his source is a deranger’s tweet)

    -Meghan was “banned” from Diana’s jewels (she literally owns Diana’s Cartier watch and butterfly earrings)

    -Meghan “lashed” out at Harry’s racist & sexist friends (Shooting party never happened at Sandringham in Nov so this NEVER HAPPENED)

    -Harry’s friends hated Meghan (Tom Bradby said his friends urged him to marry her and Meghan was literally laughing with them at Skippy’s wedding)

    -Emma Stone refused to meet Meghan (Meghan met her in 2014 and Emma promoted Meghan’s cookbook in 2018)

    -Toni Morrison & Dian Fossey on ‘Forces for Change’ Vogue cover (they’re weren’t even on it)

    • Coolio says:

      I actually made a point to DM some journalists…jack royston though I don’t always like him.. and there’s another guy Jamal Crawford smith..
      Telling them here’s all the lies in bowers book from the excerpts we have seen.
      I Dmed Ellie Hall and buzz feed as well. I feel like sometimes royal reporters refuse to do research so why not help them out. Ha
      I would suggest Sussex supports do the same. Flood their inboxes with evidence and maybe they’ll write an article calling Tom B out.

      • Sid says:

        Hall is a phony who cozies up to derangers and likes to play both sides, so I would be wary of helping her with anything. Kristen Meinzer on the other hand is great.

  21. Jais says:

    What a brazen liar he is. I’d call him a brazen hussy but he’s not even at that level.

  22. Layla says:

    Don’t really pay attention to these despots, is this the “brazen hussy” guy? I remember some old man calling M that

  23. Blujfly says:

    Bower is a tool for the right wing establishment. His wife is a Lady that was handed a title by Boris Johnson in the notorious 2020 honors list. She is a news editor that was editor of the Evening Standard. She got her start under the News International umbrella. The point of Bower’s books is to smear and place a useful cloud over any celebrity, politician or public figure that isn’t openly fascist.

  24. aquarius64 says:

    #TomBowerIsALiar is trending on Twitter. I won’t be surprised if the publisher pulls the plug on the sale.

  25. AmelieOriginal says:

    It won’t matter to the haters but the fact that the writer of that article has gone on record to tell Bower to STFU and that Meghan is lovely and amazing is not surprising but also ridiculous he even has to do that. Hopefully the book sales are pitiful.

  26. Jaded says:

    Everyone from Conrad Black to Richard Branson has sued Bowels, most won. I can’t imagine why any publisher would work with this trash-spewing idiot and I hope Meghan sets her legal pit bulls on him. And I hope more people come forward to defend her.

  27. Sofia says:

    Glad he spoke up. As many others have said, Bower is known for his libellous books and has been sued many times (I think he’s lost to Corbyn and maybe some others).

    • Not a Subject says:

      He didn’t lose to Corbyn. He was found to have committed “grotesque libel” and bc the Daily Fail had already printed exerpts they had to pay out a large fine.

  28. Little Red says:

    Ooh, Williamsburg, VA!

    A former resident of Newport News

  29. Chantal says:

    Now that these morons are shamelessly defaming reputable people in their efforts to smear Meghan, more people will speak out and publicly refute these idiotic narratives. Some people actually have journalistic integrity. Hopefully someone will sue him and his publishers into oblivion.

  30. Well Wisher says:

    Of course he did refute Bower’s untrue account of the interview.

  31. HennyO says:

    I have the feeling that the publisher is the man himself. That Fish thing for sure is not a well known /reputable publisher.
    Bowels is a brazen liar.

  32. blunt talker says:

    Let Harry and Meghan make corrections during their Spotify podcast-Disenbowel Mr. Bowers-they will use receipts.

  33. Robin Samuels says:

    I echo the compliment to Celebitchy and Kaiser for saving the pain of clicking. Thank you.
    #TomBowerIsALiar” has trended for several days. He wrote that book to appease the Sussex trolls. He doesn’t know that many probably only read tabloid articles and seldom purchase books. The statement concerning the Queen was a low blow. On her way to the funeral, a grieving widow would take time to mention how pleased she is that her grandson’s wife will not attend. Meghan was seven months pregnant then, and the pandemic was still rampant in the UK. His shot at Meghan hit the Queen, making her appear to hate Meghan more than she loved Phillip.
    I read something about the book release may be delayed for several days. If Meghan sued ever published a hit piece, she would never have had time to pursue her hope and dreams, raise her children, and love her husband. Like Piers Morgan, Bowers is a lonely older man seeking attention and receiving what he wants, perhaps not the expected outcome.