Prince Harry’s office: ‘There has been no contact’ about King Charles’s b-day party

As a way to deflect from the after-action reporting of their dumb, colonialist tour of Kenya, King Charles and Queen Camilla authorized their courtiers to go on a briefing spree about the king’s relationship with Prince Harry. It was as obvious as it was stupid, but Roya Nikkhah and Camilla Tominey both got briefed that poor Charles invited Harry (and seemingly Harry alone, not his wife or children) to his birthday party and Harry refused! I guess we were supposed to think that the poor king has only light and goodness in his heart and he’s just so desperate to mend fences with Harry (alone), except the palace sadists couldn’t help but remind their audience that the rest of the family loathes Harry. Anyhoodle, funny story: it was all palace make-believe. No invitation was extended to Harry.

King Charles is celebrating his upcoming 75th birthday with a party filled with family and friends and reports stated that Prince Harry would not be in attendance despite being invited. However, the Duke of Sussex’s spokesperson said those stories are inaccurate and “disappointing.”

“In response to UK media headlines, there has been no contact regarding an invitation to His Majesty’s upcoming birthday,” the spokesperson tells the Messenger. “It is disappointing the Sunday Times has misreported this story.”

While the Sunday Times reported that Prince Harry was invited and turned down an invitation to the Clarence House event on Nov.14, a source with knowledge of the situation clarified to the Messenger that The Palace had “never reached out.”

When reached by The Messenger, a spokesperson for Buckingham Palace declined to comment.

[From The Messenger]

LMAO. It really is amateur hour over there. While Kensington Palace is a well-known clownshow, usually Charles’s people are more prepared than this. I find it interesting to watch as Charles completely abandons “never complain, never explain” as well – Charles and his people have gone on clear, obvious and detailed briefing sprees with regards to the Sussexes since Day 1. Literally, one of Charles’s first acts as king was banning Meghan from Balmoral, bitching out Harry for wanting his wife by his side after QEII’s passing, then briefing the media about all of it. Charles did the same about Harry’s coronation attendance – for months, the palace spoke of little else besides Harry’s possible attendance. Then there was the bullsh-t about Harry staying one night in Windsor in September. I wonder why Harry decided to clap back on this one. And why did the palace lie so blatantly to Nikkhah and Tominey?

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

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

153 Responses to “Prince Harry’s office: ‘There has been no contact’ about King Charles’s b-day party”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. equality says:

    They should know by now that is what the palace does, lie that is. And the BM is probably not bothered because they got a response from PH. Now the spin will be that KC won’t invite PH, because….(fill in many blanks of lies they will create).

    • B says:

      Yep the palace & media were trying to create another circus about Harry attending this bday just like they did for the coronation, Jubbly, Betty’s 1 yr death anniversary, Phillips 1 year death anniversary and every other family occasion.

      What’s worse is that this time around that crap family & firm weren’t even inviting the Sussexes and still tried to use them to drum up interest in Chuck’s bday and paint Chuck as the loving father & grandfather while painting the Sussexes as the bad guys. These disgusting people really think they can still use Harry & Meghan however they want with no pushback.

      I’m glad the Sussex spokesperson nipped this nonsense in the bud or this would have gone on for weeks and then later the press & firm would have used this lie as an example of how Chuck keeps extending olive branches to his “beloved son Harry” & cruel Meghan.

      • JT says:

        Charles was going to used this supposed “invite” to drum up interest in his birthday party. It was another round of “will he or won’t he” again. The BM was going to write about this until the day of and then continue to write about how awful Harry was for days after. Then they would’ve thrown in how relieved the rest of the family is that he’s not going, especially Meg, with this fake invite. The rota needed a story after the forgettable Kenya tour, BP gave it to them and this was it. Harry knew the game and he nipped it in the bud.

      • aftershocks says:

        Regarding why Prince Harry did not respond to other probable lies put out by Chuck and the palace, clearly, the Duke of Sussex is a busy man. He has no intention of wasting his or his staff’s time responding to every rota lie. They would be over-tasked by having to release denials every single day.

        When Harry was in London, pre-Invictus, he likely made plans for his accommodations without contacting the palace. That’s my take, anyway. Harry was too focused on Invictus business at hand, and on paying his respects to his grandmother. Thus, he didn’t waste any time responding to game-playing by Chuck and the palace.

        In this particular instance, the lies are too blatant and pile-on. Harry picks his spots. This is letting his ‘Pa,’ the palace minions, and the ratchet carnival rota know that Harry will not allow them to get away with every nasty knock and inflammatory lie.

      • MoxyLady007 says:

        I think it’s just right.

        For the most part, H&M pay them dust and they have NOTHING to say and it’s so clear how little the RR and the BRF know and how far they reach to make anything a Sussex story.

        This simply response shut down potentially hundreds of negative stories while still giving the press nothing.

        Those are win – win and what they tend to respond to.
        Also anything printed in reputable newspapers as opposed to British media toilet paper publications. 1

      • Christine says:

        It was this part in Nikkhah’s article of a million lies yesterday, I think, that got the rapid response from Harry’s team:

        “Yet one key guest will be missing. Although it is understood Charles invited his second son to the family gathering, the Duke of Sussex is not making the trip from California. In September, Prince Harry also turned down the offer to spend some time with his father at Balmoral while he was visiting the UK for a charity event at the time of the anniversary of Queen Elizabeth’s death.”

        I think Harry didn’t say anything after the blatant lies during Invictus Games, because he was focusing on the games, and paying private respects to his grandmother. It was obvious, to any thinking person, that Harry had zero time for a jaunt to Scotland in the middle of his work responsibilities.

        Yesterday, though, it was absolutely clear that the palace is hoping for paragraphs worth of, “Harry was invited to x, but he didn’t come!!!” [poor king sadface here]

        I love that he put out his statement immediately. I think they were ready for it, there was very little lag time between the king has the sadz, and no, you aren’t going to work this lie today, England.

        They never know if or when Harry and Meghan will respond, and this move will just keep them twisting in the wind.

    • Polo says:

      Harry and Meghan are in a no win situation with the tabloids. Mainly British tabloids like daily mail, mirror, telegraph, and then page six, Ny post, sometimes daily beast in the US.

      They’ve said they’re not moving, they’re not getting divorced, they’re not demanding to stand on the balcony, friends will lots of celebrities, they’ve moved on and making their life in America, but what happens every other week from these same publications?
      They find different ways to speculate about how H&M are desperate to come back, desperate to be famous, shunned by Hollywood, desperate to move.

      No matter how many statements they make the tabloids will continue to speculate. They can’t correct every single article and it won’t matter when they do from these same tabloids.

      These same tabloids keep claiming Ben affleck hates Jennifer and they are arguing in their car every other day in pictures when they are driving or on the red carpet when it’s clear that’s not happening. They’ve put out so many PR stories but it hasn’t stopped the speculation from the tabloids.

      Some of you need to accept that there will be nothing Harry and Meghan can do to stop this. It’s will only change when people stop clicking on the stories.

      • Tara says:

        @Polo Well, I don’t think so. I just see more and more people realize what is going on there. Not only because the lies about H&M – but because of this royal family behavior as a whole. And with them constantly accusing Harry for what not behavior while the world sees more and more the consistency in his words and doings – I actually do think the media / RF is overplaying their hand and make it more transparent for the masses to see what’s going on.

    • Princessk says:

      Well done Harry for putting out a statement about the lies and telling the truth of the matter.

      • May says:

        Agreed, @princessk, and I think the reason the Sussexes did respond is that Harry probably knew this really was coming from Charles/Clarence House. What was different about this report of a declined invitation was that it was designed to make Charles look good and Harry the bad, unforgiving son. I think Harry knows well enough by now whether something reported in the tabloids is coming directly from Charles’ office or not. Harry may well have had enough of Charles spreading lies about him to make Charles look good.

    • olivia says:

      The clap back on this one is because it is no longer yellow rags like Daily Fail (with which you shouldn’t even line your bin liner with), or Evening Standard et al royalist lap dogs. Everyone knows (well anyone with an IQ above Stupid) that their prints are full of speculations, lies and pure fiction.

      This was in The Sunday Times, and albeit being a Murdoch “publication” it is still considered respectable and serious and a source of *news*.
      The reporters and writers at The Sunday Times are very proud (last I spoke to one) that they do not get the heavy hand of Murdoch with what they write (I would now take that with a grain of salt.. but.. well.. let’s give them this).
      So, I think the clapback most likely is because a reporter either was lied to by BP (which will erode trust between Sunday Times and BP) or lied in the article (which will erode trust in their work). Either way, this is a win for Harry whichever way.

  2. ThatsNotOkay says:

    I too wonder why Harry decided to respond to this. It’s meaningless to anyone but him and his family, and yet, this is the thing he wants to respond to? Doing so makes it seem that all the rest of the trash that gets printed IS accurate since he just responded to something so trivial. Better comms team is needed. Because no one in his/her right mind really cares if he visits his dad on his birthday, and yet this is making US news.

    • Eurydice says:

      Maybe because it was the Sunday Times? The statement specifically says he’s “disappointed” with the Sunday Times – like a warning to the more legitimate media to not behave like tabloids? Or maybe he’s just fed up with all the “will he, won’t he” whenever a royal event comes up.

      • aftershocks says:

        Seriously @That’sNotOkay, none of us on the outside get to tell Prince Harry how to handle these internecine warfare attacks against him, Meghan, and their children. Harry has lived this fakakta shizz from relatives and from the firm for his entire life. He knows all the tactics, all the players, and where all the bodies have been buried! Harry is a bada$$ soldier! 🫡

        It is truly tiresome to see these unnecessary criticisms and second-guessing lodged against the Sussexes. They clearly do not need advice from overwrought spectators. 🙄 Anyone who is not in possession of all the details can speculate all they want, of course. But if you ain’t in the actual line of this incessant flame-throwing ruckus, you are not qualified to tell Prince Harry what’s ‘meaningless’ or NOT!

      • ThatsNotOkay says:

        @Aftershocks Clam down. You sound unbalanced. I didn’t tell Harry anything, and neither have you, because he isn’t patrolling celebrity gossip sites wondering what randos on the Internet think of what he’s doing. On top of that, I said this story is meaningless to everyone BUT him and his family. Do better at reading, comprehending, and keeping your blood pressure down. Maybe you’ll be a better if not entirely happier person.

      • aftershocks says:

        @That’sNotOkay, as I said, speculate all you want, as everyone obviously will continue doing. What you specifically said is: “It’s meaningless to anyone but him and his family, and yet, this is the thing he wants to respond to?”

        First of all, you can’t decide what anyone else thinks is ‘meaningless.’ You can only speak for yourself on what your thoughts are. Next, you are questioning Prince Harry’s judgment regarding what he should or should not publicly respond to. I say again, neither you, nor I, nor any of us are in a position to dictate to Harry what decisions he should make. None of us are in the particular line of fire that he and his precious loved ones are facing.

        I suggest that you reflect on, and try following some of the advice you feel it necessary to direct toward me. 😉

    • Dee(2) says:

      I don’t think this makes the other nonsense printed about them sound any more realistic. There’s a big difference between responding to Harry and Meghan are feuding with the Beckhams, or Meghan buried the hatchet with Katy Perry. Versus Harry was invited by the palace to his father 75th birthday party and he turned it down. I think most people see the difference between silly tittle tattle that either celebrity could ignore or deny versus something that seems like an official invite to an event that you turn down basically lying about a large scale event. I would expect the same if someone lied and said that they were not invited to a White House event when they were or vice versa.

    • Ash says:

      Because his father was preparing to act like a victim and throw Harry under the bus. It’s a good thing he spoke up instead of allowing the media to blame him for something that never even happened. They do need a better team but in this case they were right to respond to squash the lie.

      • May says:

        @ash, sorry I did not see your post before I made one above. I think you are right, the difference here with this story was that I think Harry knew that it was his father or his father’s office throwing him under the bus. That is why he responded.

    • Ginger says:

      Supporters used to get upset that Harry and Meghan couldn’t defend themselves and correct false stories and now the same supporters get upset when they defend themselves and correct false stories. They can’t win. The squad is celebrating their freedom anniversary on twitter but want them to NOT correct false stories. The original story made Charles look like he was reaching out and Harry was awful for not coming to his party, now we know it never happened and Charles looks cold. I’m okay with that. If H&M want to defend themselves, I’m ALL for that.

    • Becks1 says:

      I think they responded to this because it was in the Times which is going to give it more credibility than a tabloid.

      I also think if you look at the stories they respond to, what they are not going to do is allow the palace to lie to make Charles look like a victim while Harry is the villain. And this story was all about charles the victim reaching out to his lost wandering son and trying to pull him back home to his family where he belongs (okay maybe not in those words but generally) and harry was like, NOPE, not today.

      And this story was also very specific so they could respond to it. the paper was saying there was an invitation, Harry said there wasn’t. If the story is about how William is incandescent with rage and Kate is the peacemaker, there’s still not a clear thing there to respond to. What is harry going to say, well he’s always incandescent with rage and he and Kate are on the verge of divorce? There’s nothing to rebut there.

      This was a very clear story that was repeated in two different papers and there was something very clear his team could rebut.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Becks, I agree with you. Even though The Times is more often than not just as bad as the tabloids, it still has a veneer of (undeserved) respectability, so imo it makes sense that if the Sussexes are going to respond to anything, they’d go with this.

    • Jegede says:


      Agreed. I side eye Harry on this.😕😕 Same way I did on the Ngozi/Hussey farrago.

      In the past year, Nikhhah has written often how Harry wants to reconcile with his family, desperately misses them , tries to contact Willy etc.
      But this story is the one he denies? The one that implies his family have reached out to him?

      The inference is that the other Nikkhah briefings were accurate

      • Ameerah M says:

        I don’t think it has anything to do with any of that and everything to do with Harry sending a message to CHARLES specifically. It’s clear they are NOT on speaking terms. And with this Harry is sending a clear message to Charles and BP that he won’t be used to make Charles look like a loving father OR to distract from Charles’ fails.

      • Becks1 says:

        Over the past few years though, Harry and Meghan have always responded to select stories. They don’t respond to every lie, but they do respond to some. So i’m not sure why people are acting like because they responded to this one all the other stories must be true.

        As i said above, this was a very specific story, carried in two fairly reputable newspapers as UK papers go. It wasn’t just “the palace isn’t sure about Harry’s attendance” or “harry might not attend the party” or whatever. It was a very specific story that Charles had invited harry and harry had said no. And Harry’s team clapped back with “nah.”

        If we think about other stories they have responded to, its usually very specific ones that aren’t just “palace sources are saying that William might think……” So this fits with that pattern.

      • Jegede says:

        Agree to disagree.

        Earlier stories in the Sunday Times quoted friends of Harry requesting a meeting with his family.
        Quoting Harry’s old friends about how he’s reached out to them blah, blah to have a sit down with his family.

        Translation is that Harry WANTS to reach out to his father and brother .
        Only THEY shut him out.
        Harry never went on record to deny these claims, even though they put words and intentions in his mouth.

        Even this recent and rare spokesperson’s response reads to me hurt at invite snub, rather then angry at father’s manipulation.

      • Ameerah M says:

        Well it reads to me like getting ahead of an entire cycle of “will he, won’t he” stories that the press used for the coronation.

      • Becks1 says:

        @Jegede honestly I think you are just reading too much into this. Harry’s team does not and frankly cannot respond to every lie in the british press. Over the past few years they HAVE responded to some lies but not every single one, even though Spare made it clear how much of the stories are, in fact, lies.

        so this is just one that they responded to. It’s not giving credibility to any other story out there, especially because we know the Sussexes speak for themselves and Harry’s old friends are not going to the Sunday Times (unless they are no longer his friends.)

      • Truth says:

        People are overreacting to this response. This response does not make the other stories true. False equivalence.

        Comments made by “friends” we know don’t really exist is not the same as his father/fathers office in a reputable newspaper.

        Meghan pushed back when Charles leaked the news about the letter she sent him. Does that mean all stories about her before were true-no. This fits what they have done and will continue to do.

      • Ginger says:

        Harry’s “old” friends. Friends that are not in his life anymore, for a reason. You are reading way too much into this.
        Meghan also picks and chooses which story to respond to and no one freaks out like they do with Harry.

      • Ace says:

        Ridiculous. If your inference is that the other briefings were true the only thing that says is that you keep believing people who have been proved liars again and again.

      • ABritGuest says:

        I did question why Harry responded on this story too because i don’t think turning down an invite after all Charles has done would even look bad in Harry.

        However it’s clear that this story was part of a palace briefing & I think the fake invite was going to be used to push Charles as the sad benevolent King trying to repair his family at Harry’s expense & I don’t think Harry wants to be used as part of that palace propaganda. Plus remember when Meghan didn’t attend the coronation & rota reporters were claiming it was her refusal to attend which was why the balcony didn’t reflect the ‘diversity’ of the ceremony? Perhaps Harry doesn’t want to be blamed for refusing to attend if there’s a family portrait & the press comment on his/his family’s absence.

        There is a specific fact that can be easily denied- did Harry get an invite or not. In this case he didnt. However in relation to previous stories by Roya etc – some may not be worth commenting on or denying. If Roya has reported that Harry misses his family- well Harry himself said during Spare interviews & the docuseries that he missed his dad & brother & doesn’t recognise them right now. He also said he missed the odd family gatherings & would miss Britain in the docuseries & im sure like most ex pats there’s things about Britain he misses. He also said in the Bradby interview that he had tried to resolve issues with his family but they kept leaking & also what would be required to reconcile but that he& Meghan were moving forward. So is it even worth denying reports eg that he wants better relationships with his family that is probably just spinning things he himself has said?

        In relation to marriage reports, they’ve denied reports like Harry staying in hotels & remember Nacho calling split rumours bs. Despite videos of Harry & Meghan looking loved up & laughing & dancing at beyonce they still focus on one picture where Harry isn’t smiling to say he was bored & unhappy so what’s the point of constantly responding on things like that when the press have set narrative. Harry said in his court papers he knows the press like to break up his relationships & prefer him single

      • The Old Chick says:

        Becks1 I thought it was a genius move for all the reasons you said. It’s just weird for anyone to suggest that the bs articles that don’t get clap back are true. That’s truly a weird perspective.

        The haters will always hate and pick on everything. Harry is doing this not for the haters, but he’s sending a message to Tampon and to the rota. It’s a missile wrapped in cotton wool. I think it’s genius. Weird that the so called fans are wetting their pants over something that doesn’t affect them.

      • jemmy says:

        @Jegede – I disagree . On the contrary, what this rebuttal means is that if this story by Nikkhah is false , then by inference all her other stories regardless of whether they are published by The Sunday Times are also FALSE. It makes Nikkhah & Tominey or any of the Palace source look stupid

        it is also putting all the other RRs who work for reputable newspapers on notice that they can and will rebut any false narrative they might try to put out there regarding Harry & Meghan.

    • Tessa says:

      Harry is not going to reply to all stories he is selective. This was the right one to respond to.

      • L4Frimaire says:

        Agree. Glad Harry shut this down because the palace and a national paper of record printed a blatant lie to smear him. Someone pointed out that other international papers would have picked it up and carried it forward that it was Harrys fault he wasn’t there, and Harry said no to this. I hear so much criticism that the Sussexes don’t communicate enough but in this case, Harry did the right thing to shut this down at the source and call them out. Charles not inviting him is not Harry’s problem and any excuse made will be hateful and bitter and makes him look like the lousy vindictive father he really is.

    • Dutch says:

      With the holiday season starting I wonder if Team Sussex isn’t trying to get out in front of a potential two month cycle of nonsense stories about different family events he’s not been invited to, snubbed from and/or terribly wasteful and generally impractical for him travel across a continent and an ocean to attend.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        Agree @Dutch. It’s a stop this nonsense statement with a longer term goal. imo The citizens of England/UK deserve to not be subjected to your bullsh*te articles over the forthcoming holiday season. The Sussexes will have a lovely holiday season no matter what. I’m jelly because I haven’t received an invite to festivities in

        The statement was direct and on point. Pretty emotionless. The Times papers are owned by Murdoch/NGN. Harry is in the midst of a lawsuit against them-not the Times/Sunday Times..yet. Just the facts, ma’am.

        There is nothing in that statement that indicates Harry is ‘hurt’. We’re talking about a man who booked out of the Conanation to the airport with hanger in hand. Not receiving an invitation probably gave him a sense of relief. Seriously. The Bee, Edward Young, is Chuckie’s (lol) Permanent Lord-in-Waiting. Harry ain’t feeling hurt not being invited to the party.

        I’ve never felt that the Sussexes NOT refuting something gave any credence to any RR’s bullshit. I’ve read SPARE (quite a bit), watched the docuseries and parts of TMYCS. My takeaway is, the palaces brief, a majority of the UK media/tabloids/RR’s will print/write lies, even when they know better and a certain set of people will believe these urinalists. agree @Ace

    • Jais says:

      I’m sorry but reading about this rebuttal just does not leave me thinking Harry needs a better comms team. But it absolutely does leave me thinking that Charles needs a better one. What an amateur. Lying and leaking to journalists that you invited your son to a birthday. What a fool and good on Harry for calling it out.

      • Gabby says:

        I hope Chuckles keeps his shitty team in place. Their incompetence benefits the Sussexes in the long run.

      • jemmy says:

        @Jais- I agree & in addition it is putting all those liars and their minions on notice that Harry will not hesitate when he deems fit to show them up as liars whose word cannot be relied on.

    • CindyP says:

      Have to disagree. This was in the Times, not a tabloid. And it was very specific. Good on them for setting the record straight. Maybe BP will think twice about putting out false garbage now that they know Harry will respond to their lies.

    • Harper says:

      This is Harry slamming Roya Nikkhah and the Sunday Times, which technically isn’t a tabloid but acts like one. Harry’s rebuttal roulette may make some journalists wary of reflexively printing the palace’s lies under their byline, because it’s their names that then get dragged through the social media mud when the Sussexes say uh, no, that’s untrue. Baby steps.

      Also, if an outlet like The Messenger can elicit a rebuttal, then hopefully more mainstream outlets will have an incentive to fact check the nonsense. Getting a real live statement from the Sussexes can raise a platform’s profile. I mean, who has ever heard of The Messenger? But it was all over social media yesterday.

      • Christine says:

        I love “rebuttal roulette” so much! That’s exactly it, and it’s perfect. Harry and Meghan cannot possibly respond to the dozens of lies that are printed about them in England, daily, but they can easily slap down the very specific lies, if they feel like it.

      • Jais says:

        Rebuttal Roulette is the perfect description. Charles is playing but he really shouldn’t if he doesn’t wana get slapped down on the world stage.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        ‘Rebuttal roulette’ is awesome @Harper. You need to trademark/copyright that quick. An excellent card game name. I’m not kidding! If there are games out there like “Tell Me Without Telling Me”, “Brilliant or BS”, “Relative Insanity” and the coup de grace, “Relative Insanity”.

        Going after the Times/Roya Nikkhah? is a choice. Roya was not a bad actor mentioned in SPARE. She’s out there now for her complicity. Any of us that have read SPARE, know Harry’s warm & fuzzy feelings towards Camilla Tominey. /s

        This statement slapped CT and the Telegraph down too. In a very smart, quiet way.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        Ack! Meant the coupe de grace being “WTF Did You Say?”.

        My longer post isn’t appearing. Harper, ‘Rebuttal Roulette’ is excellent.

      • kirk says:

        “The Messenger’s early hires, meanwhile, included Dan Wakeford, an entertainment journalist and former editor in chief of People, and Neetzan Zimmerman, who was credited with boosting The Hill’s social traffic and engagement.”

    • Robert Phillips says:

      He responded to this because it only has to have the one statement. Done. Most of the other things would require back and forth. To actually answer them. Because when you answer one that makes three more questions that need to be answered. And once you start that it never ends. And that is what the press wants.

    • Princessk says:

      Of course he needs to respond to lies and slurs against him and his family which seem to be coming from Palace insiders.

    • PrincessK says:

      It is not trivial when a supposedly reputable newspaper writes blatant lies which make the Sussexes look bad.
      So Happy Harry called out the lies.

    • Mairzy Doats says:

      Harry has been clear in word and in deed (targeted lawsuits) that he aims to disrupt the twisted relationship between BM and RF. His response to a blatant lie is a shot across the bow for BM and specifically Sunday Times that they are legally responsible for what they publish. They should take this as a reminder to either not make up stuff or to not blindly believe everything that RF tells them, and that there can be consequences for carelessly disregarding truth. Probably Harry is more interested in throwing a monkey wrench into the media and RF dynamics than actual legal action, but wouldn’t this be a pretty easy lawsuit? Either there was an invitation or not. Nothing ambiguous about that.

      • Jais says:

        It feels important to remember that, while the Sunday Times is not a tabloid, it was this very paper and Valentine Low that published the obviously bs bullying smear against Meghan, right before the Oprah interview. It’s considered a paper of record or a broadsheet or whatever but it’s still a Murdoch-owned joint. The tabloid mentality rots the entirety of the BM. Harry calling this paper out is pointed.

    • Chelsea says:

      ThatsNotOk seems like a good username for this user because this personal attack in response to @aftershock’s response was so unnecessary. @Thatsnotok your original comment was very clearly criticism not only of the sussexes’ team but Harry for responding and is incredibly dismissive of how these lies spread about him for years have affected his image and mental health. You’re entitled of course to criticize but it’s unacceptable to make personal attacks against someone else for disagreeing with your criticism. This is a public forum: we all won’t agree but we should still have decorum.

      And to your original point: I understand him not wanting lies about him to be used to 1) cover up how mid his father’s tour was and 2) prop up ‘poor sad charles who misses his grandkids’ especially since we all know that criticism would’ve just ended up resulting in weeks long pile ons on Meghan. There will always be something from the firm and their gutter press but I respect him putting up boundaries arund what he will and will not allow his family to be dragged into.

    • Gem says:

      King Charles isn’t just Harry’s father, he is his monarch. Outright saying no to his face to be part of his birthday celebrations in a 75th birthday which is considered milestone would leave a bad taste. There’s difference between the stories we see circulated every day about silly nonsense and this. Also, it was printed in a publication that UK doesn’t consider tabloid. Also, Charles always blames Harry for alienating him from his “beloved” mixed race grandkids. All of that combined, this in my opinion is not a story they should be allowed to spread far and wide. I am glad they shut this nonsense as fast as they did.

  3. Maxine Branch says:

    BP lied to get the publicity it is currently getting from Harry’s denial. At this point any Sussex glow will suit these despicable folks. For Harry I think it was a bridge too far. Why now after all the lies we have witnessed? No clue but this particular lie opened the door for Charles to be dragged and rightfully so.

    • aftershocks says:

      I don’t think Sussex supporters are doing H&M any favors by over-obsessing and over-analyzing every choice, every move, every response and non-response. By doing so, Sussex supporters are only adding to the carnival frenzy. In my opinion, sideline observers need to stand down and accept that Harry and Meghan are not our personal friends or family members. We are not in their lives. Take a step back and chill. Allow events to play out and tone down the obsessive outrage, critiques, clamoring, and naysaying.

      The Sussexes are thriving and succeeding. I doubt that I, nor many others, would be doing as well if we were facing the same level of ongoing attacks, smears, gaslighting, character assassinations, and daily provocations!

  4. Selene says:

    Sometimes I don’t think the palace lies to these commentators. I think they take it upon themselves to create whatever narrative they please, with the safety net that they usually don;t respond or contradict what they lie about. This time, H & M had time.

    • ML says:

      Selene, I’m also not sure if the palace lied here, since it wouldn’t be surprising if Tominey and Nikkah just came up with these stories themselves. What is clear though is that the BRF has no issue ignoring these stories, so they become unofficially officially sanctioned. When the palace has an issue with what’s written, the BM either pulls the story, clarifies or apologizes and the didn’t here. I’m curious as to H specifically calling this narrative out at this time. I’m sure KC doesn’t appreciate H being so public and transparent about the invitation!

      • L4Frimaire says:

        Nikkah was in Kenya with Chuck’s tour. I think she was briefed by the palace and they all knew it was a lie. They also thought the Sussexes wouldn’t push back.

      • Christine says:

        Word, L4Frimaire.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        Ooh @L4Frimaire, Nikkhah? was in Kenya with them? That really plays into the “invisible contract”. Kenyan journalist marginalized. Camz not getting out of a car to join Chucky. Whoops, there it is. How to deflect??????? Bejeebus, Harry is “snubbing” his Harry “snubbing” his biological father who pulled security, financial and NO emotional support/empathy is not a win that the RR’s think it is. Harry is not missing the wee party.

  5. I love that their spokesperson has cleared this up. I doubt the stories will change on salt isle. It will continue with the he was invited, he wasn’t invited, olive branch, he isn’t coming, he demands an invitation. This clearly is Harry showing what fools his family are and clearly shows the contract between press and the cult.

  6. Becks1 says:

    I think Harry clapped back because this was in the Times and Telegraph, and those are generally going to be more respected publications than the Sun or Mirror. Clapping back makes it clear that they all lie when it comes to the royals. And they haven’t cut off contact with the Times the way they have with the Sun.

    The fact that both Tominey and Roya had this story makes it clear it was part of a briefing. Sometimes I do think the RRs (especially Tominey and Eden) just make things up for the sake of clicks, but we also know they do get a lot of briefings from the palaces. And here I think its clear BP was setting up a “poor Charles, neglected by his younger son despite his efforts to reach out” narrative and Harry just blew that out of the water.

    Also, I think he clapped because I think there is an element of surprise here. They publish lie and after lie, and H&M can’t correct every single one, it would just be too much. but once in a while they correct something and I think it always throws the RRs off guard, like they don’t know what is going to be corrected or when.

    • Legally Black says:

      Co-sign! This is a really good assessment.

    • Jegede says:

      The Times & especially The Torygraph have been briefed far worse palace machinations about Harry, – and especially Meghan – via Camilla Tominey & Allison Pearson that have never been denied.

      • Becks1 says:

        They have absolutely denied some stories from the Times and Telegraph. they don’t respond to every one because who has time??

        And as I said above, I think they responded to this because it was very specific and it was something they could respond to very succintly and clearly.

        And like I also said, there is an element of surprise here. If the RRs don’t know when the Sussexes are going to respond, they’re going to be caught off guard and have egg on their face when they do respond.

        I just think it is a very weird response from people that “they denied this which means all the other stories are true.” Um, no?

      • Jegede says:

        I didn’t say they never did, I said they rarely do.
        Torygraph’s Victoria Ward for one seems to be in contact with Archwell spokespersons.

        And these same actors have this year alone written specific briefings on familal relations – about specific events, Coronation, Queen memorial, Windsor placements e.t.c, damaging to Harry & especially Meghan, that were never denied.

        If one as laughable as this can warrant a hurt response while other more egregious briefings were ignored, it’s a WTF for me.

      • Ameerah M says:

        You seem really attached to the idea that this was a “hurt response” when there’s no indication of that. The only thing that he expresses disappointment about is The Sunday Times reporting a made up story.

      • Jais says:

        I think you’re right about the element of surprise @becks1. By not correcting everything, bc honestly they are living their lives and not spending all of their time correcting every tiny nonsense, it lulls the RF into a false sense of security. And makes it even more impactful when he does choose to correct something. All I’m getting is that Charles is the one with a poor comms team.

        Hmm @ameerah m, do you think Harry believes the times made this up? I feel like he likely knows his father’s team leaked it. But he has no exact evidence so he’s sending a message by calling out the times story.

      • Ameerah M says:

        @Jais – oh I think he KNOWS this is from his father. Which is why he responded. I think he is sending a message that he is not going to be used as a shield t cover for his father’s unpopularity.

      • Jegede says:


        Because it reads to me that way simple as that.
        Hurt rather then indignant.
        Focusing on the Times for mis-reporting, than father mis-briefing.
        Especially as the original story gave short shift to a wife & 2 children.

      • Becks1 says:

        I don’t know why you’re insisting this is a hurt response. It’s not. It’s a factual response and a specific clapback to the Times. Nothing about this says to me that the other lies spouted by the Times are in fact truthful. Harry made that clear both in Spare and in their docuseries.

      • Jegede says:

        I insist cause that’s how I read it – hurt response focusing on the Times than the story’s source- ‘Pa’.
        As opinions do defer on forums.

        And as most other Times so-called ‘lies’ from the same outlet and exact reporter were rarely corrected, I deduce Harry was happy for those interpretations to be out there.

      • MsIam says:

        @jegede I don’t get your point at all. Harry is not going to engage in verbal ping pong with his father and brother and the press over everything. Just what’s important. And thisis not about a party imo this is about impugning Harry reputation, especially as a mental health advocate. Just like they try and do with Meghan and her sperm donor. Although Toxic makes the job harder because of his behavior. But you can believe the Rota was all reved upped to write about how Harry is so cold to his poor elderly father, not even going to his biiiirrrrttthdaaay paaaarty!!!!! When the opposite is true that Charles is and always will be a manipulative A-hole. The place flipped a coin on what would look like the biggest snub and they lost.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        @Jegede, did you read SPARE, watch the H&M docuseries on Netflix? Roya was the nefarious RR that put out that story. Harry is not fooled by who else might be involved. He is putting out a statement. No Contact regarding invites. He’s not hurt. The statement was a ginormous middle finger to the BM and BRF. He’s not hurting anymore. See, he has a very wide group of influential, important and loving friends. Loving is key. Chuckles knows that Harry is the better, more popular son that draws attention and best used as deflection. Except, that doesn’t work anymore.

        Because I Am That Asshole, Jegede, you need to be more clear why you think Harry is “hurt” and why anyone gives fucks to RR’s. opinions.

    • JJ says:

      Absolutely agree with this take! He would expect the Times to hold themselves to a higher standard than the tabloids. Nothing wrong with Harry making that statement at all.

    • Sunday says:

      Completely agree. Also, while the pattern of what Meghan or Harry respond to may seem random to us, it’s possible they’re only responding to briefings from specific people. I think they ignore (or have their lawyers threaten where applicable) anything coming from the KP smear campaign, but I do think they respond to Charles.

    • Whyforthelove says:

      Becks1 your assessment is excellent. I also wonder if it is just getting easier. Like the first dozen times you stand up to your Narcissist abuser it’s hard, but after 4 years of it…he can do it without a thought. Nope didn’t get andninvite. Wouldn’t go if I did, but yep it’s a lie …H&M are getting more practiced. And the palaces never get anything but worse 🤦🏻‍♀️

    • Brandy says:

      I also wonder if his lawyers are advising him as to which stories are okay to respond to (if he wishes) in a effort to add examples to his court cases.

      • Becks1 says:

        @Brandy that is a very good theory.

      • Whyforthelove says:

        Brandy that is a great point

      • Saucy&Sassy says:

        Brandy, I think that is quite likely. The article was clear that an invitation had been issued and H had refused it. The Times & Telegraph aren’t considered tabloid media (???), which makes this worse in my opinion. So, a statement was issued and stopped whatever the plan was with the bm going forward.

        I had another thought, too. I smiled when I saw the names of the two people who wrote these articles. I hope H smiled, too, when the denial statement was issued.

  7. Miranda says:

    LMAO, f–king LIARRRRS! 🤣🤣 So pleased to see that Harry is finally fed up with the twisted “Charles as devoted, but cruelly rejected dad” fanfic, and I hope we see more “well, actually-ing” in the future.

    Frankly, it’s sad in a way, because anyone who has read Spare will know that Harry clearly still loves his father, but the man can only take so much. A person with a conscience might be shamed into acting right, but Chuck is as self-absorbed as they come.

  8. Dee(2) says:

    There was no reason to say anything in the first place. Harry wasn’t talking about this at all, let the newspaper speculate and write articles about whether or not he was coming they’re going to do that anyway. And when he wasn’t there speculate why he didn’t come, because they’re going to do that anyway. But instead they decided to operate in this mid-90s playbook yet again and lie as if no one can rebut them. This is why they are losing and will eternally lose the PR side.

  9. Jan says:

    The Times was a reputable Newspaper before Murdock bought it, so many people still think it’s a reputable, so Harry nip it in the bud.
    Harry knew that leak was from Clarence House, Times is Chucky run to paper, that is why Harry called out the paper.
    Why he didn’t respond about being turned down at Windsor Castle, because he going to be selective on which lies he respond to.
    Next month it will be the same thing for Xmas.

  10. Nerd says:

    I love that he responded to this lie. This one may be trivial but all of the others are obvious lies that are proven wrong by what we know from their interviews, Spare, the documentary or just using common sense. They keep using different variations of this lie and now it has been shut down and after the Byline article it even shows how horrible Charles Windsor really is. I don’t think they were expecting a response to this article which is why this is so great. It’s letting them know that Harry and Meghan can’t be predictable and can expose their lies whenever they want and the world will notice.

    • Miranda says:

      That’s an excellent point about this being a demonstration of Harry and Meghan being less predictable going forward. They’ve always been armed with both the truth and the receipts, and I don’t think the RF or the RR have respected that. They’re so used to dictating their own storylines and inventing their own “truth” that they’ve been so incredibly unprepared on the few occasions when H & M have chosen to clap back, that their response is always either silence that speaks volumes, or something that boils down to “NUH-UH!”

      • aquarius64 says:

        This was the most stupid story to date. The Palace insider said no one reached out [to Harry] for the invite. BP just threw Camilla and Royal under the bus, making it look like they cooked up that birthday story. The BM continues to validate Spare, the Netflix docuseries and Oprah interview with stunts like this. Harry’s rebutal made to People Magazine, an US outlet the BRF relies on for American exposure. Camilla and Royal also provided free adverting for Omid Scobie’s book Endgame and Byline Times’ series on the Dan Wooton scandal. Interest will grow thanks to this. Way to go ladies.

  11. Amy Bee says:

    I think Harry’s tired of being used as a distraction by the Palace. I said yesterday that the Palace has seemed to have stopped briefing against Meghan because everytime they try to malign her she claps back. I think Harry has decided to do the same. It’s interesting that the press is never upset when the Palace lies to them and I have no doubt the Palace lied about Harry asking to stay at a Royal residence in September.

  12. Tessa says:

    I thought Charles was not going to have a large party. And now he is.

  13. Tessa says:

    The dm is reverting back to harry looks miserable at concerts spin. Tiresome and tedious

    • Jegede says:

      Like clockwork.🙄🙄

      And the next time the Torygraph & Times klan kabal of P Wyatt, Tominey, Nikkhah, Shipman, etc are again briefed that they’ve been told Harry is miserable, there won’t be any spokesperson clapback.

      • Becks1 says:

        There doesn’t have to be a response to the stories that Harry is miserable at concerts bc the videos speak for themselves and we can see that he is not, in fact, miserable. They ran a few stories about how bored he was at Beyonce and then the videos came out of him dancing with Meghan and those stories stopped very quickly.

      • Jegede says:

        Those Beyonce stories haven’t stopped here in Blighty.
        They are BS and were well ignored.
        But even yesterday, selected shot were still been used to push a narrative.

      • Ace says:

        You seem strangely invested in how bad their comms team is working. Maybe you should send them your CV?

      • ABritGuest says:

        I mean people like Petronella Wyatt, Allison Pearson are blatant bigots who mainly do opinion pieces. Not sure it’s worth it or even possible to issue denials on opinion pieces that are essentially Meghan is a “gold digger who has used dark arts to seduce our beloved Prince for money & titles”. And Camilla tominey is a habitual liar. Her big lie that Meghan made Kate cry was exposed on Oprah but she still tried to spin the incident to suggest they both cried etc after Oprah interview. What’s the point of going back & forth with that type of reporter when because of her political coverage too she doesn’t even have much credibility.

        There’s so much rubbish out there & the press (and in some ways the palace) want H&M constantly going back & forth with them rather than getting on with their work & their lives. So I think H&M have guard rails on what they will respond to.

      • Jais says:

        So I actually remember Roya Nikkah going on American news programs after Spare came out. And with a strait-face, she said that the RF does not brief the press. She actually said that. So calling Roya out here is perfect bc she’s either making it up and lying or the RF briefed her and she was thus lying when she told American news programs that the RF does not brief the press. So Harry calling her out specifically has proved she’s lying either way. Think she went on cbs but I’d have to check.

        Boom, found it. She was talking to Gayle. My god. The audacity.

      • Haylie says:

        I detect trolling. Everyone else, proceed with caution…

      • jemmy says:

        @Jegede, if what someone said something in the past has been accepted as the truth because it was uncontested , the day that same person makes a statement that is then contested & pointed out as a lie would make any REASONABLE PERSON question whether what has been said IN THE PAST BY THE SAME PERSON WAS ACTUALLY THE TRUTH. This is how people get caught out for misdemeanours/ crimes committed in the past.

        Now bring that same rationale to this story of Harry’s rebuttal. Stories written by Nikkita / Tominey about Harry and published in the Times may have up to now been accepted as being credible . However this but rebuttal from Harry changes the ASSUMPTION that whatever has been written in the past by these two journalist is credible. Going forward , their assertions would been taken with a grain of salt . It also puts on notice the credibility of the Sunday Times as a the conveyor of truth as well as those other publications/ journalist who believe planting salacious stories about Harry & Meghan is a right owned by them.

  14. Jegede says:

    The invite story mentioned one guest. Harry and Harry alone.

    Cruel Chucky again makes it clear he doesn’t acknowledge his daughter-in-law, nor his grandchildren.

    This clapback seems more hurt at the implication Harry snubbed the King.

    • Truth says:

      To me it’s factual. I haven’t received communication or an invite. Period.

      • Sami says:

        @truth As someone not following royal news everyday this is how it read to me when I saw it on People.
        I was quite surprised that they would so blatantly lie like that.
        Sounded to me like Harrys team saying there’s no snubbing happening when there hasn’t been any communication in the first place.

    • Chantal says:

      @Jegede Ok maybe Harry is hurt. Understandable. But I think he’s pissed bc not only is there no communication or invite for him and his wife and kids but his own father lies to the press about it, knowing the type of negative bs stories this lie will fuel? Not only would I have clapped back, I would have gone off! This was just a straightforward response correcting this stupid lie. There are many things one can and should ignore for one’s mental health but sometimes, when people go too far, you have to say something. Esp disrespect at this level. C-Rex is lucky the Sussexes don’t refute more of his lies. But theyre too busy with their own businesses and endeavors to constantly obsess over the pathological Lying King and his lying minions.

      I’m always amused when these same people are shocked when they get their asses handed to them after blatantly and unashamedly printing such libelous lies. Harry keeps letting them know he’s not playing by suing the hell out of them and they still won’t stop bc bashing the Sussexes is still lucrative. That Bylines Times expose is still being covered and is damaging so FAFO BRF and BM, bc karma is waiting…

    • PrincessK says:

      Yes, l noticed that. Very annoying the way they ignore Meghan and the children.

    • aftershocks says:

      @Jegede: “This clapback seems more hurt at the implication Harry snubbed the King.”

      How can you determine what Harry is ‘hurt’ about, out of all the continued firestorm of lies and abuse?? By this stage, I would imagine Harry is rather immune to all of the rota & BRF gaslighting, lying, snubbing, and BS gameplaying. H&M have faced the worst with grace, and battled back with great courage. They have moved on with their lives and have made peace within theirselves, to preserve their mental health and well-being. They are probably handling everything at this stage, with the help of their advisors and counseling therapists, by remaining calm, professional, and methodical in how they respond or ignore.

      You are the one positing ‘hurt’ @Jegede, everywhere in this thread. Obviously, that’s your reaction, NOT Harry’s.

  15. Gem says:

    Charles always briefs media as if Harry is keeping him from his mixed grandkids while he has made no attempt to reach out and try to make them part of his life. I think Harry is simply fed up and disgusted with it. This birthday story was like a, enough of this, nonsense moment.

  16. Laura C says:

    Maybe KC told aides to invite him and they did not (as Camilla runs the show and she said no) and Harry is making sure his father knows that no invitation was received. I can imagine Camilla being that sneaky…
    Who knows, but I’m glad he clapped back.

    • advisor2u says:

      Good point. Camilla is indeed running the show at PB, as the rags/RRs/royal mouthpieces have told their audiences many times already.

    • Laura D says:

      That’s how I saw it as well Laura C. Harry knows that family better than any of us and probably suspected Camilla had “something” to do with the invite. As you said this is Harry letting his father know that his devious wife is up to her old tricks again!

  17. advisor2u says:

    If you hire a tabloid executive to do your PR & Comms, that’s what is going to happen; your whole communication strategy will become one of lies, gaslighting, planting and twisting of stories to deflect from and to burry misconducts and scandals.

    Reminder: since June last year, as the then Prince of Wales, Charles hired Tobyn Andreea – who was the deputy editor of the Daily Fail – as his Communications Secretary (we know now that at that time QE2 was already suffering from severe illnesses, most prob. cancer).
    It’s now as clear as daylight that Charles’ Private Secretary Alderton and Andreea together, have transformed C&C’s Court and the Buckingham palace’s Comms Team, into the second headquarter of the Daily Fail’s head editors’ room.

  18. Brassy Rebel says:

    The Times did not “misreport” the story, Harry. Pa is a liar.

    • Becks1 says:

      So I think this is part of why Harry is calling this one out. This is like Crygate, in that I do think Tominey had the story from a solid source (Kate, Carole) about the incident. Remember her expression the day after Oprah? She was shell shocked that she had been lied to. She couldn’t out her source, but she kept saying her source was good or solid or whatever and……I think it was. her source just lied to her.

      Same thing here. The Times did not misreport. Charles lied. But the Times either has to say they were lied to by BP sources, or just take the loss and accept Harry’s criticism.

      • Jais says:

        @becks1, yeah I just posted above and agree that roya is well-sourced. But then I remembered she actually told gayle edwards that no one from the royal household ever briefs her. So either way, calling this story out, is making her outright to be a liar. Either she’s totally lying that Harry was ever invited or she was briefed by Charles and subsequently lied to gayle edwards on an American news show that she never gets briefed. It’s really discrediting to her as a reporter. She’s pretty much caught out lying in cbs mornings. She shouldn’t be allowed to speak on those news program again.

  19. Angie says:

    Sometimes it’s a matter of simply being fed up with the bullsh_t.

  20. Over it says:

    If I were Harry my response would have been if the likes of camel toe the liar and roya the other liar want to continue to play act at being journalist, the least they could do is print the truth or at least fact check their stories before hitting print .

  21. Dora says:

    They lied about the invite because they keep forgetting Harry is his own man. He doesn’t take marching orders from the palace, Williams people or anyone else. They lie he calls them on it. They have learned nothing. The smart thing would be to invite the entire family, put on a show and pretend. To let his racism and resentment of losing a punching bag and pretend that all is well. His mistreatment of Harry might please William and fed his pettiness, and it might make him feel shitty that Harry, the most popular person besides Diana and the queen, left their sorry racist ass when they tried to kill his wife

  22. Ace says:

    Oh no! They’re gonna have to come up with a different storyline for Chuck’s birthday! I give them a few days until there’s another “source” talking about how inviting the Sussexes was considered but they decided not to because they would make everything about themselves. They’re not very original, we know this.

    I wonder if BP will try this again for the innevitably will they/won’t they Christmas visit or will be now worried that Harry would confirm again there’s no invite.

    • Polo says:

      Yup the new storyline will come from Tom Sykes and the daily beast then they’ll bring out Richard Kay again. Most likely this weekend if not earlier we’ll get a new version.

    • Jais says:

      Well, they tried to throw Harry under the bus but that didn’t work. So who’s next? Poor Kate. We’re about to hear that she refused to take George to the birthday party unless Harry was definitely not invited.

    • B says:

      Yep @Ace they are not original. Give it 24hours and it will be the same old same old. They’ll choose one of the following:

      1. The family hate the Sussexes and they are being snubbed

      2. The family can’t trust the Sussexes because of NETFLIX

      3. Charles bday is such a super special event that they can’t risk the Harry and Meghan show overshadowing them.

      4. The family is “fed up” with the Sussexes for reasons

      That family/firm’s dysfunction is only surpassed by their incompetence and mediocrity.

  23. aquarius64 says:

    This was the most stupid story to date. The Palace insider said no one reached out [to Harry] for the invite. BP just threw Camilla and Royal under the bus, making it look like they cooked up that birthday story. The BM continues to validate Spare, the Netflix docuseries and Oprah interview with stunts like this. Harry’s rebutal made to People Magazine, an US outlet the BRF relies on for American exposure. Camilla and Royal also provided free adverting for Omid Scobie’s book Endgame and Byline Times’ series on the Dan Wooton scandal. Interest will grow thanks to this. Way to go ladies.

  24. L4Frimaire says:

    I’m glad Harry’s people responded to this lie and shut it down. The palace can make all sorts of excuses but the fact is Charles didn’t invite him, hadn’t spoken to him in months ( which makes me skeptical of those stories about invitations to Balmoral) and then lied that Harry turned them down. Harry and Meghan put up with a lot of lies and insults from the royals and UK press but glad he very firmly stated this didn’t happened and called out the times. Then suddenly it’s no comment from those buffoons. I just wished Harry had said he wishes Charles well on his bday to end that statement.

    • Becks1 says:

      So one of the things that I think is smart about this response is that it also is kind of a response to so many other stories.

      If Charles didn’t invite Harry to his bday party/celebration/whatever, do we think he invited harry to balmoral? do we think he invited him there for a night before Wellchild? Do we think he’s going to invite Harry for Christmas?

      this one statement killed a lot of those other stories.

      • L4Frimaire says:

        Agree. It calls into question all these other so-called invites. They didn’t happen. Why do they even think they need to carry on with this BS nonsense?

  25. Sunny O says:

    I can only imagine what it must feel like to have to publicly refute a lie, worldwide no less, from one’s own father.

    It’s heartbreaking to see.

    I’m so impressed with Harry and Meghan for taking the lies on, and facing the lies head on, with their heads held high.

  26. BlueNailsBetty says:

    Didn’t Harry and Meghan say they would not use anonymous sources to speak for them? The article refers to Harry’s “spokesperson” but doesn’t actually name who allegedly gave the comment. Why is everyone assuming this is actually an official statement from Harry’s office?

    • Kel says:

      One of the publications maybe oriole did have their publicists name listed out. This is an official statement from their spokesperson.

      • BlueNailsBetty says:

        I’m sorry, I’ve tried to google this but nothing came up. What is “oriole”?

      • Kel says:

        Haha I meant People. I think also NY Post of all tabloids as much as I hate them named her in their story as well.

  27. Lau says:

    Also Charles (and William) want the Ecology King crown but keeps on b*tching about putting Harry in a plane to attend his stupid birthday ?

    • Mary Pester says:

      Oh how I REALLY REALLY hope this is harry doing what I said yesterday, and saying “fk of pa”.
      Everyone has A breaking point, where they will say “enough and no more”.
      And I think that because it was “The Times” that printed the lie, that was what Harry decided was “enough”. He saw a decent (until recently) newspaper resort to gutter tactics and wasn’t having it. Harry was a soldier, you pick your battles and arm for them. Harry knew that in calling out this lie, and the Palace having to ADMIT it was a lie, will make it harder for papers to print bullsht and get away with it, because they never, ever know when stealth Harry will clap back. The Palace have been embarrassed, the Times has been embarrassed, and how I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall when the times asked WHY they were given bullsht to print

  28. Hilary says:

    I’m honestly so exhausted for Harry and Meghan and it’s not even my life. I’m truly tired! How they manage to deal with this is beyond me but I would never want to be in their shoes. I hope they continue to find joy no matter the situation and I truly hope there comes a time where the royal family actually gets called out by the press and public for their horrible treatment of Harry and especially Meghan.

  29. Jaded says:

    The gutter press would have gone after Meghan if this hadn’t been shut down STAT. They would have spun it as “Meghan ordered Harry to turn down b-day invite from Charles” or “Meghan demands that Harry refuse to attend father’s b-day celebration because she’s a control-freak”, or “Sussexes on the brink of divorce because Meghan wasn’t invited to Charles’ b-day party”, yadda yadda. Wash, rinse, repeat.

  30. phlyfiremama says:

    Great job calling those pathetic liars OUT and setting the record out. Expose them for who they are! H&M win again.

  31. tamsin says:

    I agree that this is a story that they can clearly refute. Also, it is printed as a news story in two supposedly serious publications- not tabloids. Harry long ago identified the four tabloids with which he will never traffic with. Made-up stories such as an impending Sussex divorce can simply be refuted by Harry and Meghan simply carrying on with their lives together. They will have press speculating about their lives probably for as long as they both live. To refute every lie and speculation is simply to give the gutter press fuel. And question for the people who are always saying the Sussexes need a better communications team, what exactly should they be doing instead? What are your suggestions?

  32. Beverley says:

    I love this for the lying liars! Old habits die hard, don’t they?

  33. Chelsea says:

    Harry and Meghan obviously can’t respond to everything but i think Harry was right to draw the line here. Ever since they saw how well Harry’s welchild visit and Invictus went BP has been pushing out this line about how Harry’s so terrible for not being desperate to rekindle a relationship from his sad sack father who evicted him and his family from the only home they had in the UK. Harry ignored it for a while(probably not wanting to distract trom Invictus) but this lie-perfectly tims to take the spotlight from Chucky’s mid Kenya tour- was something they were going to hammer at for weeks if not months and i get why he decided to put a stop to it.

    I also appreciate that the language of this denial doesnt give away anything on Harrys emotions about this non invite and puts the onnus on the Times so either Roya is going to have to burn her sources or just take the hit and the story becomes about the palace/Murdoch broadsheet purposefully putting out hit jobs on Harry who was just minding his business watching Katy Perry with his wife and friends.

  34. Serena says:

    Good god, could they be more embarrassing? They want Chuck and and Peg to be painted as wronged victim so bad, and since they have no material they make it up. What a clown show.

  35. Liz in A says:

    I hope this is the start of a new, strategically clapping back era. Obviously I wouldnt expect or want them to clap back against every little bs story out there, but this took the air out of a lot of sails quite quickly and eliminated cycles of news coverage on will he or wont he how dare he snub his Pa storylines. Good for him!

  36. Tanisha says:

    I don’t believe the palaces lied to Tominey or Nikkah. I believe those spiteful dried up prunes would gladly lie on behalf of the palace🤷🏾‍♀️🤷🏾‍♀️

  37. CarrieV says:

    Harry Dakota’d Charles. 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
    No, Charles. You did not invite me to your birthday. Ask your courtiers.