Dorries: The Sussexes should be given security & a Kensington Palace apartment

Nadine Dorries is some kind of former Tory MP turned Daily Mail social/political commentator. I have no real frame of reference for the American equivalent – maybe someone like Claire McCaskill, a former senator turned MSNBC political pundit? Something like that (update, I was trying to figure out an equivalent of a government official-turned-pundit, I was not comparing Dorries’ politics to McCaskill’s). Well, Dorries wrote a column about how she’s on Team Sophie Turner, a column which I mostly ignored. As it turned out, Dorries actually buried some royal commentary at the end of her Mail piece. This is very curious:

After their triumphant State visit to France last week, I hope King Charles and Queen Camilla are enjoying a G+T or two. All those people who said Charles would struggle to step into his mother’s shoes have been forced to eat their words. The royal visit did more for international relations than any politician ever could.

But I can only imagine the pang Charles must have felt knowing that his success abroad is tempered by the ongoing family rift with Harry and Meghan. As a parent, you are only ever as happy as your least-happy child, whether that child is four or 40 (as Harry will be next year).

Charles will know that two issues go to the heart of whether he can heal this rift. The first is the issue of protection. When the Sussexes are in Britain, the threat to their security is serious and genuine. This problem falls on the shoulders of the Home Office: as I know all too well, a basket-case of a department. To say Harry can’t have full police protection, even if he pays for it himself, is a nonsense. Suella Braverman needs to get this sorted.

The second thorn is accommodation on the Royal Estate. There are enough rooms in Kensington Palace: let Harry and Meghan have a few so they have a safe and familiar place to stay. The children can get to know it – and it will give them a strong sense of their heritage. Prince Harry will always be of royal blood, and though family rifts are always painful, time is a great healer.

[From The Daily Mail]

“As a parent, you are only ever as happy as your least-happy child.” Whenever we see Prince Harry, he looks happy, rich, well-laid, well-endowed and handsome. These people are desperate to convince themselves that “their prince” is somehow deeply depressed more than three years after he left his toxic and abusive birth family and set himself up in a California mansion with his beautiful wife and two children. As for her solutions… what’s shocking is that so few people within the British media, government and royal institution admit that Harry’s security concerns are real and that it’s a completely bonkers position to say that Harry can’t pay the Met police back for his security when he does visit the UK. As for this new talking point (being floated by Buckingham Palace) that the Sussexes should be given a few rooms in Kensington Palace… they literally never should have been evicted from Frogmore Cottage. That decision will haunt Charles forever – he evicted his grandchildren from their safe and secure British home out of spite.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

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

95 Responses to “Dorries: The Sussexes should be given security & a Kensington Palace apartment”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. JT says:

    It is so odd how rooms a KP are being bandied about, when FC is right there. Why not just give them back the home they paid to renovate and lease if H&M want it back. Why must they end up at KP, where they didn’t want to be in the first place?

    • Em says:

      To force them to cough out money for another round of refurbishments

      • Kelsey says:

        And to get them back into the “fishbowl” that so many other royals have complained the London offices are. They want to know their every move so bad smh.

      • Olivia says:

        Cruelty is the point, right? You are so right.

    • Steph says:

      I’ve been thinking the same thing since yesterday. Harry will never accept accomodations at KP. They know this. They are going to eventually use it to make Harry look bad. Claim they offered him space but he refused and is being ungrateful. Also I noticed they keep saying “give him a place.” I think that’s bc as Kaiser pointed out yesterday, it’s a form of control. Without a lease they’d still have to communicate their movements with Charles.

      • swaz says:

        The Sussexes have moved on, this is just a new talking point. I’ve never heard of anyone being offered a new place to stay by the person that evicted them 🤣🤣🤣 this is just too funny 🤣🤣🤣The eviction didn’t do what they thought it would have done, Harry is still in an out of the UK.

      • Yvette says:

        I think Harry and Meghan should just buy their own property wherever they feel comfortable in England and set up their own security. I agree that Charles evicted them from Frogmore because they could come and go as they pleased. It was a power move for control over the Sussexes.

        LOL! They should buy a property near, but not in/on one of the Royal Palaces or Clarence House, to continue to come and go as they please. That would irritate the heck out of the Royal Family and the media. 🙂

    • SussexWatcher says:

      If I’m Harry and Meghan, I wouldn’t even want Frogmore Cottage back at this point. They’ve moved on and away from that toxic family and sometimes there really is no going home again. And maybe I’m being paranoid, but I wouldn’t put it past that family to have bugged the house if it were given back to the Sussexes!

      Plus, we’ve seen that Harry is able to slip in and out of the country without being seen and also wherever he has been staying has been secure and private. So it seems they do have options/friends/Spencer family to stay with in the off chance Meghan and the children ever visited in the future.

      It seems clear they’re not coming back to participate in ANY royal events (except funerals) so IMO they no longer need that UK “homebase.”

      • Taytanish says:

        This right here @SussexWatcher. “They’ve moved on and away from that toxic family and sometimes there really is no going home again. And maybe I’m being paranoid, but I wouldn’t put it past that family to have bugged the house if it were given back to the Sussexes!.” They all, Charles included, thought that evicting the Sussexes from FC would mean the Sussexes never coming back to the UK, and if they do, they would be begging for accommodation. I believe that Harry stays with people that never rat him out, and I believe not even the BRF knows where he stays when he is in London. They all possibly think he stays with his maternal relatives and they have no way of that being confirmed or denied since none of the palaces gets along with the Spencers. And the palaces now realize that even though they evicted him and his family, there’s still no way of controlling prince Harry and that’s really eating at a lot of people. I believe that now they all realize that giving the Sussexes protection would be a way of knowing the Sussexes where abouts once they visit London and the minions are realizing that all theiy did was really shoot themselves in the bellend.

      • Angie says:

        Harry said him and his family are moving on. No more mixing with that family accept with members he is close too. Do people really expect Meghan to have her sweet children around them haters? You can look at Meghan and see she is all about good and positive energy. Those people need to move on and leave the Sussex family alone.

      • MinorityReport says:

        I slightly disagree that they don’t need a UK home base. Harry wants his children to be exposed to British culture and the country of his birth—and they’re a prince and princess of the realm. While I can see them never having a home on a royal estate, I would not be surprised if the Sussex family eventually purchased property in England.

    • Missskitttin says:

      I still don’t understand why they took a cottage the queen gave them as a gift and they paid so much to repair…

      • Chrissy says:

        Because they could! They used it as a cudgel to beat and control H&M. And they they left for good!

      • notasugarhere says:

        I don’t understand why people fail to understand ‘gift’ doesn’t mean ‘giving you a real thing forever’ when it relates to royal housing. That ‘gift’ often means allowing you to live in that place as long as the monarch who let you live there is still alive.

        Or for a Crown Estate property for which you can have a legal lease, unlike Frogmore Cottage? The legal leases for Royal Lodge and Bagshot Park were still stated as QEII ‘gifting’ Andrew and Edward the homes. It is the weird language they use.

        QEII ‘gifted’ AK47 a house to live in on the Windsor Estate. Charles took it away, because the ‘gift’ was only the ability to live in that house as long as QEII was alive.

        QEII ‘gifted’ W&K Anmer Hall. What does that mean? They don’t own it, it remains part of the Sandringham Estate now owned by Charles. They were ‘gifted’ the ability to live there as long as QEII let them. That’s it.

        This is the way it has often been with royal and real estate. Before W&K were in Anmer Hall, it was leased out for profit. Before that, it was leased to the Van Cutsem family so Charles/Camilla could have their affair there. Prior to that, it was ‘gifted’ to the Duke and Duchess of Kent.

        The Frogmore Cottage thing was weird, since it is one of those rare places the monarch themselves controls. It doesn’t qualify for a *legal* Crown Estate leases, so it was always a more fragile choice for Harry and Meghan to make. If they had accepted Apartment 1 at Kensington Palace, things might have been different. The press was always going to attack them for whatever taxpayer money was spent on it, and they were always going to spend their own money on furnishings and finishings.

        Harry and Meghan made the choice – their own choice – to pay back every penny for their time spent there. It gave the press a smaller bat to beat them with, but it was *their choice* to pay that money back. They could have chosen not to do it, because there was no legal reason for them to.

      • Lady D says:

        Thank you so much for the explanation, nota. Some of the rules and doublespeak coming out of the RF is incomprehensible to us mere mortals.

      • Kingston says:

        @notasugarhere says:

        “If they had accepted Apartment 1 at Kensington Palace, things might have been different.”

        I hate it when folks try to rewrite history even as it is unfolding before all our eyes for everyone to see and recall quite clearly.

        How can anyone say, in light of well known facts, that Apt 1 was a viable option for H&M when in Spare, H again addresses that question for posterity when he explains, inter alia that: he and M were offered several options by courtiers, but as far as H&M were concerned, those options were too expensive and didnt have that je ne sais quoi that can only be felt, not seen.

        In other words, the options presented to them before they turned to betty and she suggested Frogmore but warned that it was a construction site, were too hifalutin, large, and appeared not to lend themselves well to the sense of “home” that H&M wanted to create for themselves.

        And about KP Apt 1 : not only was it occupied, but the renovation works that were required on that place, including the removal of asbestos, was so much, it was a given that it wouldnt be completed before Archie was due to be born and botomline: H&M DID. NOT. WANT. an apartment in KP.

        The end.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Apartment 1 was going to be renovated regardless with taxpayer funds. The Gloucesters were already going to move out, they’d been trying to move out for a decade. They offered Apartment 1 to W&K but W&K refused it. They DEMANDED the largest space at KP, 1A, which was already occupied by Historic Royal Palaces.

        Harry and Meghan didn’t want to live in 1, it wasn’t going to be ready in time, etc.. It was still Harry and Meghan’s choice to choose Frogmore Cottage. They could have chosen to accept a smaller London apartment like Anne, Alexandra, etc. and find themselves a different country home to rent.

      • aftershocks says:

        The Sussexes had a legal lease for Frogmore Cottage. Their lease had not expired when Chuck sent them an eviction notice, out of spite.

        Chuck erred in listening to the rota spin about Harry’s book, rather than reading it himself. Harry said in Spare that he was writing it, in part, to help his father and brother to deeply understand why he left, since they pretended not to comprehend what was obvious.

        Harry’s very act of asserting his independence and his value as a human being, is apparently an affront to Chuck, to Willy, and to the firm.

      • aftershocks says:

        The Sussexes had a legal lease for Frogmore Cottage. Their lease had not expired when Chuck sent them an eviction notice, out of spite.

        Chuck erred in listening to the rota spin about Harry’s book, rather than reading it himself. Harry said in ‘Spare’ that he was writing it, in part, to help his father and his brother to clearly understand why he left, since they pretended to not comprehend what was obvious.

        Even beyond the ‘no-no’ of writing his memoir, Harry’s very act of asserting his independence and his value as a human being, is apparently an affront to Chuck, to Willy, and to the firm.

      • notasugarhere says:

        As I wrote, that lease wasn’t a legal lease. As someone else wrote on here months ago, Frogmore Cottage is one of their weird (royal peculiar) buildings where you cannot have a binding legal lease on it. The monarch controls them, no rules apply.

        I wrote about it back in 2019 about how weird the whole thing was, how we weren’t given any info. I didn’t know about it being one of these ‘peculiars’ at the time. I just thought it might be related to Harry and Meghan wanting privacy around the arrangements and the royals agreeing not to release the info.

        It isn’t a regular Crown Estate property like Royal Lodge, Bagshot, Thatched House. It is part of a group of unique properties at Windsor. Frogmore Cottage, Garden House, wherever AK47 was living, Adelaide Cottage. All of those are properties where no lease can be purchase or be legally binding. The monarch gets to decide who lives there and who doesn’t. It was an annual gamble Harry and Meghan were up against. Why QEII made that weird offer is up for grabs.

  2. LadyE says:

    AHHHHHH!! No no no!!! Please don’t think Nadine Dorries is anything like Claire McCaskill! She is a straight up disaster woman who is a Johnson superfan in the most insanely desperate and inappropriate way- I can’t even explain how unsettling her fawning over Johnson was. She “resigned” because she wasn’t made a peer after Johnson put her on his honors list and then sat around for MONTHS not actually resigning until finally they gave her the boot. This article is a bit of a stopped clock situation- I’ll give her credit for not being a nasty Sussex hater, but she is…I’ll say an odd duck who will def jump strange on any number of topics (including Sussexes I’m going to bet)

    • SarahCS says:

      She’ll talk about anything that will get her some publicity.

    • Mei says:

      Absolutely this. I’ll up your ‘odd duck’ to ‘a fkin waste of space’ while she was Culture Secretary. One of the worst sycophants that he ever promoted/tried to make a peer, thank god that didn’t stick. While I agree with what she says here about ‘When the Sussexes are in Britain, the threat to their security is serious and genuine.’ (say it louder for the idiots in the back), she’s only saying it to bash the current government, not because she’ll actually be on their side and want them to be safe and secure.

    • Emma says:

      All of this. The way she used to look at Boris was stomach churning. Anyway, this has got next to nothing to do with the Sussexes and everything to do with her having a pop at her ‘enemies’ still in government. If the Home Office et al were providing security, she’d be demanding it be yanked, pronto. Interesting the Daily Mail let it through though, very much not their normal flavour.

      • aftershocks says:

        Sounds as if this opinionated woman, Dorries, has NOT read Prince Harry’s ‘Spare.’ If she hasn’t, then she needs to stfu and take several seats. Half-in, half-out ship has sailed. The Sussexes have left the toxic firm! They are never going back to be a part of that dysfunctional, de-humanizing institution.

        Neither Chuck, nor Willy feel they need to apologize for what the firm and the rota have done, and continue to do against Meghan! Their doubling down on their perfidy is a non-starter. Also, rota clowns like Dorries need to stop dismissing the fact that Archie & Lili have a family legacy and heritage on the Ragland side, just as much or more than on the Windsor, Mountbatten, Spencer, and Markle sides.

        The Sussex family are obviously privately in contact with the Spencers and the Raglands, plus Archie & Lili have loving godparents and intimate family friends to lean on and to learn from. I would imagine that Harry maintains contact with some of his Windsor cousins too, who are considered ‘minor’ royals. 🙄

        H&M’s children will learn what they need to know about their British heritage through their Dad and via contact with friendly British relatives. It is Chuck who chose to strip his son, daughter-in-law, and grandchildren of their secure Frogmore Cottage home in the U.K. Reap what you sow, C-Rex-III.

    • SURE says:

      It’s actually quite shocking that she isn’t a nasty Sussex hater given her politics.

    • Tarte au Citron says:

      Oh Mad Nads. She’s genuinely dreadful even by current Tory standards, promoted waaaaaaaaay above her level because she was such a BoJo loyalist.

      She’s one of those politicians who wants to be a talking head celebrity. Reality shows, writing, anything like that.

  3. equality says:

    I guess, at least she admits that H&M do have real security risks and that the HO is a “basket case”. Here’s an idea though: let H&M have back the residence they actually paid for. Others in and outside the RF got that sort of pay for repairs/maintain the property deal to lease at Windsor.

  4. Tessa says:

    What triumphant tour. The Paris trip of c and c was hardly a triumph.

  5. Jais says:

    It absolutely should haunt Charles forever. He evicted Archie and Lilibet from a safe home to visit out of petty spite. Pos grandfather. Dorries saying the obvious about the security and then saying bravermann should get it sorted? Um, I cannot see Suella Bravermann sorting anything like that. That woman’s humanity is nonexistent. Finally, why in the world would Harry and Meghan want to stay at KP? And potentially ru into evil KP staff who smear her? They will not expose their kids to KP.

    • Lucy says:

      It will haunt Charles publicly. I think privately it’s clear he doesn’t give a flying flip. Such an asshole.

  6. SarahCS says:

    Dorries is AWFUL. She’s a BoJo loyalist who was remarkably bad at any job she was given, she announced that she would quit “immediately’ as an MP after she didn’t get nominated to be in the house of Lords when he was pushed out (but still got to do an extremely questionable resignation honours list) and finally resigned 81 days later.

  7. Slush says:

    “ That decision will haunt Charles forever”

    Honestly? I don’t think it will. I think Charles, the rest of the family and courtiers, and Royal loyalists feel perfectly justified in everything they do to Harry and Meghan. H&M left the cult – that’s the only unforgivable sin.

    • Steph says:

      I don’t think @Kaiser meant haunt his conscience. Like you said, he’s perfectly fine with his actions. It will haunt his image. Any time accommodations for the Sussexes are brought up ppl will be reminded that Charles is a petty POS father/grandfather.

      • Slush says:

        I see what you mean.

        I agree that the likes of us will feel that way, but does the majority of the British public? Honest question bc I’m not a Brit 🙂 but from where I sit, they don’t seem to be suffering many consequences for their treatment of H&M.

      • Steph says:

        I’m not British either but the few times they’ve been on public soil in the UK, the average person seems to have given them a good reception. So I think people notice. As far as consequences, no there won’t be. People have known Charles was a crap father since Diana’s funeral. He’s just going to go down as an unlike King.

  8. MrsFonzieFace says:

    Nadine Dorries is a laughing stock of the highest order. But a broken clock is right twice a day, the M and H are entitled to accommodation and security. Joke’s on Charles because there’s no way they’ll every trust him on these critical issues again. I know I wouldn’t.

  9. BQM says:

    They continue to write the same stories—some based in fact, some made up from their own heads. Just to have clickbait content.

    But Harry is DONE. They have nothing more, until Charles dies, to really write about as it pertains to Harry and the uk. The coronation was it. He did the Diana statue, his grandfather’s funeral, the jubilee, his grandmother’s funeral, the coronation. Nothing to do with the RF, short of a death, is bringing him there.

    They could’ve had Sussex attendance, even with kids as they got older, at Christmas, trooping ceremonies—with Harry in uniform riding along, both done up for ascot, commonwealth services, etc. Basically elevated bea and Eugenie level stuff. But nope. Now they can just cover, from a distance, invictus, polo matches, award ceremonies.

    It’s good she acknowledged the security issues. But Charles could authorize the intel and RPOS, and the Sussexes could get their own home with their own security. supplemented when they’re in country. But they’re not going back to a royal property. Any future property will be theirs, no strings.

    • SussexWatcher says:

      💯 to everything you said, BQM!

    • Christine says:

      Bravo, well said.

      Honestly, I just have to roll my eyes at these stories. Chuck, you took Harry and Meghan’s home where they brought Archie home after he was born. The home that was a “gift” from his grandmother. They are never going to trust any bed, in any place, associated with this garbage family, ESPECIALLY because you yanked it from Archie and Lili.

      Move on, Leftovers. They. Are. Americans. Now. They don’t need your welfare housing.

  10. SussexWatcher says:

    Yeah, no to this nonsense about giving them KP rooms. They had a literal home already that was wrongfully taken from them (in the sense that they had a lease and paid for the reno, etc.). Those people – king Chuckles and his mistress queen, Pegs the Unhinged, and the British trash media – wanted the Sussexes/Meghan gone. And now they’re gone and it’s clear they’re not coming back so just deal with it and move on to covering the Leftover Royals.

    As I said in one of the posts the other day, if I were the Sussexes, no way would I stay in a royal household at this point. I’d be concerned for my literal safety, or at the very least, worried about being spied on.

    I’m glad to see the ex MP confirming Harry and his family need security when visiting Salty Isle, but it’s too late to wish for the rest (reconciliation, staying at BP). Move on!!

    • notasugarhere says:

      Thing is they didn’t have a lease. Or at least they didn’t have a legal, public, multi-year lease like Andrew and Edward did.

      Frogmore Cottage, Garden House (where cousin Margaret Rhodes lived for years), the house AK47 was ‘gifted’. All of those are under weird rules where Crown Estate leases don’t apply. Meaning nothing illegal was done here. Unethical as hell, but not illegal. If they’d chosen Apartment 1 at KP, things would have been slightly different.

      Harry and Meghan chose to pay for upgrades in the reno, where they selected more expensive finishes than the Crown Estate would have picked. In the end, they chose to pay back all the reno plus the annual lease. They were not legally required to pay for all the reno. They chose to do that, as I wrote above, to give the press one less bat to beat them with.

      • Kingston says:

        How many times are folks gonna present the false argument that H&M had an option to choose KP Apt 1 and “chose” not to take that fallacious “offer”?


      • notasugarhere says:

        Apartment 1 was on the table from when W&K married. The Gloucesters have wanted to move out for years, they offered it to W&K who refused it. The ‘stables’ was already being renovated for the Gloucesters to downsize to, which was freeing up Apartment 1 for Harry and Meghan. They made a different choice. I’m not saying someone wasn’t pulling a fast one on them, but let’s not remove Harry and Meghan’s agency here.

      • aftershocks says:

        Harry & Meghan wrote on their original Sussex Royal website exactly why they happily moved to Frogmore Cottage when it was offered to them by the Queen. Per Harry, Apt. #1 at KP was an option, but that apt required extensive, time-consuming, and very expensive renovations before they could feasibly move in. Time was of the essence because they needed to be settled before Meghan’s pregnancy due date. It worked out for them that necessary structural renovations to Frogmore were nearly complete prior to the Queen offering it to them. What chiefly remained were interior finishes, which allowed H&M to request their specifications and personal preferences. Plus, everything would be completed in time to move in well before Meghan’s late April 2019 due date.

        As far as whether the lease was legal, I’m not sure what is being referenced in that respect. The Sussexes still had a valid lease in effect. Chuck could have waited and privately told H&M that the lease would not be renewed, instead of making a public show of evicting them, out of spite.

      • notasugarhere says:

        As I wrote above, whatever they had it was never a legally binding lease. Those unique properties are controlled by the monarch, at the monarch’s discretion. I have no idea why QEII chose to put them in an untenable situation. Maybe she was so far gone, she didn’t understand the sheer level of hatred William has for Harry. And how Charles will continue to kowtow to his elder son out of fear.

    • Jais says:

      So one thing I’m curious about. Does the crown estates put out a yearly financial statement? At some point, will it show a specific amount of lost money, as in the exact amount the Sussexes we’re leasing FC for? Which was actually market rate right? Bc isn’t the crown estates losing money if no one is leasing FC? Or is Charles covering the lease from duchy money? Is he now essentially paying for the Sussexes not to stay at FC? My knowledge of the inner workings of the Crown estates and royal real estate is not great so maybe I’m asking questions that don’t make any sense.

      • aftershocks says:

        In regard to the move to FC, additional factors mentioned by Harry were privacy and security, which the former is not the best at KP. Plus, the country retreat H&M were renting in the Cotswolds had been publicized by tabloids, making it unsafe for them to ever return there to live. Thus, FC hit a number of checkpoints:

        1. renovations would be finalized in time to move in well before April 2019;
        2. Windsor Great Park was more private and secure;
        3. they enjoyed Windsor environs, having spent a lot of their courtship days there;
        4. the construction repairs and interior updates were less expensive than for Apt #1 at KP;
        5. honestly, they preferred making their primary home in a country setting.

  11. Tessa says:

    Lily and Archie are of royal blood. So how come the writer mentions only harry. Also Meghan became a royal when she married Harry

    • SussexWatcher says:

      You know why. Racists are gonna racist!

    • Hyuna says:

      They always call him Prince Harry or the Duke of Sussex, but they rarely call Meghan the Duchess of Sussex, or call the children Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet.

  12. After a triumphant state visit they should knock back a g and t or two? I the she has knocked back more than two with this fakakta article. Chuckles should give Harry a few rooms and his protection back. Chuckles should never have taken it in the first place. You can’t put toothpaste back into the tube ( well the valet can’t) so maybe go back and knock a few more g and t’s back and call it a day with trying to now tell Chuckles how to fix things.

  13. YeahRight says:

    Meghan doesn’t want to be anywhere near her husband’s family. She also doesn’t want to take her children around those hateful people. Even with a uk home and security. Nice to see they are admitting that H & M has real threats against them so they do need security.

  14. Alexandria says:

    They just want HMALD back so that they can step and stomp on them. Bullies always want their victims to return. Tories want them back to distract from Brexit and their other disasters.

    • Hyuna says:

      Charles and his heir don’t want Harry back let alone Meghan. Only the British media and British people are still desperate for Harry to return to their country. But the Windsors don’t want Harry.

      • Christine says:

        I think there has to be some part of Willnot’s brain that knows he has always needed Harry, but he will never admit it.

        There is such a disparity between how the two brothers have been treated their entire lives, and it’s more than obvious now which brother is positively contributing to society, while the other bumbles around, looking for relevancy in a world that has no use for him.

        Harry used to mask how irrelevant the royal family is, at a fundamental level, just like Diana. How could they not, they are both bright lights.

        The rest of them are just flapping in the wind now.

  15. Laura D says:

    Nadine Dorries is a right-winged shrill with an unhealthy obsession with Boris Johnson. The woman has no scruples whatsoever. It took her 81 days to “resign with immediate effect.” The woman is still bitter because Sunak took her name off the honours list. Trust me when I say this is not about H&M but, a means of trying to embarrass both Sunak and Braverman. If Sunak had let her have a title she would be saying nothing about H&M and would probably join in the usual “hate for hire” brigade.

  16. Newt says:

    I doubt Charles loses sleep over that decision. I think he’s just petty, jealous man. He was raised to be that way. They all were. The only difference is it didn’t ‘stick’ with Harry. He’s too much like his mother and they never counted on him taking a stand and leaving.

  17. Maxine Branch says:

    The ship this woman is speaking of has sailed. The golden geese are not coming back nor are their children. They smeared, lied and mistreated this couple to the point of mental duress. There is no reason for them to return short of Charles burial.

  18. Amy Bee says:

    Nadine Dorries is crazy more in line with MGT rather than Claire McCaskill. As a former government minister she would understand the security issues involved but this new narrative that Harry and Meghan should live in KP is press driven. The press want Harry and Meghan back in London so they can stalk them and the Palace can spy on and leak against them. KP shouldn’t be brought up when Frogmore Cottage is available.

  19. Alexandria says:

    This. There is NO indication of regret from Chuck. The attack dogs are still there. He genuinely thinks he did nothing wrong. As H said, they have accepted there will be no accountability and HM will move on.

  20. ales says:

    No matter what anyone says Harry and his children have royal blood and are part of the british royal family lineage. They deserve to have respect and their heritage be honored. Jealousy gets people into trouble. Kate is a low level commoner, a social climber and a mean girl no matter what she does, she cannot be of royal blood. No amount of blackmailing or bitchery will make her royal. She is a married in, who seems to believe she is superior to so many people. She forgets she is only royal as long as she is married to William, her family are commoners and grifters. Her treatment of Harry and his family is disgraceful, a waste of space, a manipulative and bullying mean girl, always marking her territory like an alley cat. Meghan born a commoner but has always behaved with graciousness, kindness and caring for others, she works hard, has class, charm, tries to make others feel that they matter and is the complete opposite to self indulgent Kate do-little.

  21. Jan says:

    What successful tour is she talking about?
    Chucky showing the World that he don’t have any manners, leaving his wife to plod down the airplane ramp.
    England is not getting any trade deals with France, since they left the EU.

  22. Mslove says:

    I can’t get past Chuck’s treatment of A & L. It’s despicable. I bet he doesn’t even remember their names. As head of the Church of England, he should apologize to the Sussexes and set a good example for Pegs to follow. But he’d rather be a grifting villain with a big bag of cash in each hand.

  23. moderatelywealthy says:

    Harry and Meghan paid for renovations at Frogmore. Charles evicted them.
    Maybe this is all Charles wanting a way out of compensating them of the money spent while looking like a doting grandfather.
    Harry might as well get his money back and buy some small property at the Cotswolds.

    • notasugarhere says:

      They chose to pay for the upgraded finishes, then they chose to pay for all reno costs when they weren’t legally required to.

      Harry was always going to have to pay for his country housing. Sorry people don’t like the idea, but it is what it is. He wasn’t the heir to the heir, William was.

      Anne’s estate was purchased for her outright before anybody was paying attention. As a working royal, she is allowed to live off the taxpayers in a townhouse at SJP when she’s in London.

      As a working royal, Princess Alexandra also has a freebie apartment at SJP. Her ‘country pile’ is Thatched House. Her late husband, Angus Ogilvy, purchased the lease on that Crown Estate property himself.

      Andrew, after the Sunninghill debacle? He pre-purchased the Crown Estate lease on Royal Lodge for decades. He paid millions for the restoration, which the C.E. reviewed and decided was sufficient for him to have that lease for 7+ decades. He gets (or used to get) a freebie double suite of rooms at BP free as a working royal.

      Edward gets a freebie double suite of rooms at BP free as working royal. His ‘country pile’ is the Crown Estate lease on Bagshot Park for decades to come. As with Andrew, he paid millions upfront for restoration and got the legal lease for decades to come in exchange.

      In both Edward and Andrew’s cases, I think QEII pre-paid them their inheritance by buying those leases for them. Meant she could take care of them for decades AND they didn’t have to pay tax on it.

      As working royals, Harry and Meghan would have been given access to a small freebie space at KP, BP, or SJP. Maybe not keeping Nott Cott, but getting a double suite of rooms at BP, an apartment at KP or SJP. Their country home was always going to be on their own dime. NottCott was their ‘freebie’ space at KP, they chose to lease a country house in the Cotswold’s until their security and privacy was invaded.

      The difference is, Frogmore Cottage is in weird no-man’s land when it comes to Crown Estate leases. Just like Garden House and AK47’s former house as I wrote above, it doesn’t fall under legal rules and was always insecure housing. Why QEII chose to make that decision? Was she fully in charge of her faculties in 2018/2019 when the decision was made? I doubt it. Was it the fault of the courtiers around her who knew exactly what they were doing and deliberately set up Harry and Meghan?

      I wrote on here at the time, way back in spring 2019, that this was a weird choice. That we weren’t being given the same type of information about Frogmore Cottage that we were given about all other royal properties. Something was fishy about that leasing situation all along. I didn’t know if it was related to privacy concerns or what, but it wasn’t normal.

      • moderatelywealthy says:

        “They chose to pay for the upgraded finishes, then they chose to pay for all reno costs when they weren’t legally required to.”

        Because the usual suspects were screaming at them , never forget that. The way you phrase it make it seem this decision was not made under any sort of pressure and I think it is important to remember , especially since you conclude there is something definetly fishy going in in regards to the royal properties, which I agree.

      • JTH says:

        “The way you phrase it make it seem this decision was not made under any sort of pressure”

        Yes, there was so much press about the cost of renovations/repairs to Frogmore. Silence about any repairs / reno to the other royals’ residences

      • roooth says:

        Andrew paid millions, Edward paid millions…..all these royals getting decades long “leases” for their mansions…..but they aren’t really paying millions of dollars that they actually earned themselves. They’re paying millions that were given to them as royals and they pass that on to other royals to pay for houses that they were given control of. It’s just a game, moving money around that never leaves the Family.

        Only Harry & Meghan actually paid for their home with their own money, no royal shell game.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I’m not saying they weren’t under pressure, nor am I taking away their agency. They could have chosen to accept Apartment 1 as their taxpayer-funded main home and leased another property in the country on their own dime. They weren’t required to pay back their rent for X number of years, but they did it anyway for whatever reasons they chose. As the press was going to attack them either way, I would have said f*ck it and not paid the money back.

        The money for Edward and Andrew’s leases came out of QEII’s stockpile of a billion in tax-free personal cash, not the Sovereign Grant (or whatever it was called at the time) or other taxpayer funds. They are public, legal leases that can be questioned at any time. Same as the lease Princess Alexandra has on Thatched Cottage, which her husband purchased (he purchased the lease, not the house).

        One reason Harry wasn’t offered a similar deal was because he wasn’t a monarch’s son at the time. QEII set up her children as children of the monarch, Harry wasn’t at that level yet.

  24. Mary Pester says:

    Picture a big sloppy st Bernard drooling over it’s favourite treat. THAT is how Nadine used to look at boris (bloody useless) Johnson. She would sit beside him in parliament and every time he stood up to bluster some rubbish or another, you could almost see the puddle forming on the floor from her slobbering up at him. 1st point, Charles will always be known as the man who was willing to put the lives of his son, daughter in law and grandchildren at serious risk!! He will also be known as the son, who from the moment his mother died, went against EVERY one of her wishes, and snatched back her wedding gift to her grandson.
    2nd point NO, NO NO, There is as much chance of my living to see another spring, as Harry asking his dogsht father’s for ANYTHING. He has managed to get in and out of the UK, without anyone knowing where he is, so he doesn’t need him.
    3rd point, Harry’s problems with RAVAC were all down to Charlie and his henchman who shouldn’t even have been on the panel.
    4th point Harry and Megan’s children are happy, content and loved. There is no way Harry would stay with them in KP or BP because Harry knows they wouldn’t be safe because every move they made would be telegraphed to the press.
    So fk you Charlie, you have set your own legacy and that of your wife

    • Jazz Hands says:

      In that case, I hope Harry does ask his dogshit father for everything under the sun if it means you seeing many more springs to come! You are a gem and these comment sections wouldn’t be the same without you! <3

  25. girl_ninja says:

    Ma’am! Not well-endowed! Lololololol 🤣🤣

    And the church says Ameeeeen 🙌🏾 for our good sis Meghan 🤸🏼‍♀️

  26. aquarius64 says:

    They’re floating KP because Charles looks bad for kicking the Sussexes out of Frogmore and they need Intel on the family for the papers. It’s about control.

  27. QuiteContrary says:

    I’d love to see H&M get space on the Spencer estate. I’m not sure if that’s even possible, but it would make the point that Harry’s mum’s family is caring for them in a way that his father refuses to do.

    • Mary Pester says:

      @quitecontrary, I actually saved the speech that Charles Spencer gave at Diana’s funeral, and I can still hear the applause echoing in from outside and said “good” as I watched Charles and Philip squirm in their seats

      • QuiteContrary says:

        That was unforgettable @MaryPester. I know Charles Spencer is a bit of a tosser himself, but in that moment, he was incredible.

  28. Beverley says:

    The Britshit media are desperate to have H&M back in the UK to abuse. How will they make fun of Princess Lili and Prince Archie if they aren’t in a royal property where their dogshit granddad can brief against them? How can they compare the little biracial royals to chimps when they’re hidden away “overseas”? How would Charles & Camilla make a point of cruelly snubbing and marginalizing the Sussexes if they aren’t local? How will the rota rats make their living? Who will cover for Pegs when he ascends the throne? Oh the horrors!

    How awful! Harry and Meghan are abusing the Royal Family and the British press by refusing to live in England where they can be hounded, spied on, and picked apart in person in real time. They’re refusing to play the game where they are the convenient scapegoats for their vile family and lucrative prey for the rota rats. The Sussexes are choosing violence by starving the racist vipers who live to destroy them.

  29. Emmitt says:

    This woman is correct, Charles is only as happy as his least happy child.

    Except Harry isn’t Charles’ least happy child, WILLIAM is. And what makes William happy is the complete domination and submission of Harry and erasure of Harry’s wife and children.

    So because Charles is afraid of William’s rages plus William’s end game aligns with Charles’s, Charles is more than happy to torture & mistreat Harry to appease William (and Camilla).

    Nothing will appease William except Harry to return to be William, Kate and George’s slave and the demise of Meghan, Archie and Lili. All parties involved know this and they know it’s why Harry & his family won’t be back.

  30. Well Wisher says:

    What happen to the argument of the Sussexes being excluded from access to finances for not being ‘full time’ royals?
    An inane one that still stand in the way of Harry’s vital need for security.

    Charles did as he was told, he evicted them not before
    pulling Harry’s security, why can’t that be enough for the

    They got their wish, Meghan left, she did not attend the coronation…
    That’s their pound of flesh, she is standing in truth….

    The fact remain that Harry is entitled to security and privacy…..
    Kensington Palace is not an option, Kate is against it; but most
    importantly, the Sussexes refused to live there as her neighbours…

    Stop beating a dead dog……
    Harry will now make proper arrangements whenever he goes to his
    homeland, they will exclude meeting with his father and brother, because
    it is not allowed.
    He cannot afford them the opportunity to publicly snub him, nor his family….

    • Well Wisher says:

      Notable mentions from @HenryVIII
      Charles is desperate for his youngest son to give him content he can give to his tabloid overlords.
      The audacity of thinking Harry & Meghan would spend a single night in Kensington Palace.
      I think that unless the palace really does a 180 on security and leaking to the press, Meghan and the kids aren’t coming to the UK.

  31. Satish More says:

    They just want to be able to spy on the Sussexes, both in whatever palace housing they might be given, and through the “security” guards. In fact, I’d bet that whatever bugs and cameras are planted in the housing, the audio and footage goes STRAIGHT to the Daily Mail offices. They’d be spying on the Sussexes in real time, too.
    As Kaiser has said, the UK tabloids are ESPECIALLY pissed post-Invictus, but I think that despite them raging, they are attempting a gentle-seeming tactic. They figure Harry would be suspicious if Charles suddenly was offering housing and security, so they’re trying to make it look like Charles was pressured by the media, and THAT is the only reason he’s offering it. These people are SUCH amateurs.

    • Well Wisher says:

      The Sussexes’ as content, there is now another unemployed royal reporter…..
      Low sales, low advert income…

  32. Jeremy says:

    Harry and Megan would never be stupid enough to stay in any royal residence again – it would just be a way for Buttons and Peg to spy on them. Plus I wouldn’t put it past them to try something with the kids.

  33. Ann says:

    If I were Harry and Meghan, I would buy my own home. Harry can go when he wants. Meghan and the kids could possibly go. Much better than everyone knowing their coming and going from Frogmore Cottage.

  34. Whyforthelove says:

    I think Charles has finally realized that he looked like a Jaxkass when he evicted Harry from his London base. But this is too little too late, they have moved in and of all places, they are not going to stay at Will’s cough home base.

  35. blunt talker says:

    Anything offered by the royal family will come with strings attached-we can spy on you whenever we want to-we can bug your phones and house whenever we want-we will control your movements whenever we want-bottom line this is a trap.

  36. blunt talker says:

    PS-we can leak lies or misinformation about you whenever we want.

  37. Jillybean says:

    Maybe the least happy child is referencing William

  38. sammi says:

    Nadine Dorries was Culture secretary cum Boris sycophant air head. Whilst meant to be at work as an MP she went on TV programme ‘I’m a celebrity get me out of here.’ Sunak denied here a Peerage because she was so appalling at her job and then was forced to resign .

    This is weird commentary and has an agenda to get access to the sussex movements as leaks from Kennisington Palace plagued Diana and Harry and Meghan. Who want s Met Police protection with the state they are in now and all Harry wants is Higher MI5/6 intelligence information to help his own private security now. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex would be very welcome in Sussex with its green credentials and Gatwick airport and many private airfields
    Some beautiful properties in Beautiful Sussex which would welcome their Royal Highnesses and Royal children with open arms!

    • Satish More says:

      Sussex IS beautiful! My aunt has a holiday home in Sussex, and I am forever trying to wrangle an invite! I love it there! And what could be more appropriate that the Sussexes buying a home in Sussex?