The Telegraph: The Sussexes leaked all of the ‘birthday phone call’ stories!!

It’s time for one of the most mind-numbing games if you’re a royal watcher or a Sussex watcher: tracing a rumor to its source. The reason we’re doing this is because Gordon Rayner wrote a truly bonkers piece in the Telegraph called “Charles and Harry are talking… but is a reunion a bridge too far?” I thought it would just be stating the obvious, which is that one birthday phone call is a good first step between father and son, but no one should get ahead of themselves. But no, Rayner has seemingly been tasked by Buckingham Palace to blame the entire days-long “will Harry call his father” psychodrama on Camp Sussex, as if the palace hasn’t been openly briefing about the Sussexes all along. Like the palace didn’t get called out BY HARRY for lying just last week!

So, if you’re keeping track: the BBC got a “tip” on Tuesday that Harry would call his father on his birthday. The Archewell spokesperson said as much last week, when they denied the “Harry snubbed his father’s party invitation” story. Then on Wednesday, the Sun got the “tip” that Harry had called and the king also spoke to Meghan. Then the Telegraph’s Vicky Ward got the tip that not only did Charles speak to Harry and Meghan, they also sent Charles a video of Archie and Lili singing happy birthday. The Sun and Victoria Ward’s pieces read, to me, like they came from Buckingham Palace sources, that Charles was extremely eager to use Harry and Meghan’s names this week. But please allow Gordon Rayner to make wild claims about how Harry and Meghan are apparently regularly calling up the Sun and the BBC to brief them on phone calls?

The phone call story came from Camp Sussex??? Is this really a “turning point” in the relationship between the King and his younger son, as the Sussex camp would have us believe? If so, why is Buckingham Palace so reluctant even to acknowledge that a phone call took place? Or is it just more spin designed to put Harry on the moral high ground in the ongoing battle for public sympathy? The fact that the Palace does not deny there was a call means we can safely assume that there was indeed a conversation between Harry and his father on Tuesday. That in itself is significant, because the two have barely spoken since Queen Elizabeth II’s funeral, and there was no contact at all when the Duke of Sussex celebrated his 39th birthday in September.

Sources in California?? Which leaves the questions of: who instigated the call? Why? And why did they want the public to know about it? The answer to the first part of the question is straightforward, as we know that sources in California have said Harry phoned his father, sent him a video of his children Archie and Lilibet singing Happy Birthday to him, and that the Duchess of Sussex also spoke to the King. As to the why, well-placed sources have confirmed that Harry tries to contact his father on every birthday, and is not always successful.

This is still the most idiotic rationale ascribed to the Sussexes: There are lots of moving parts in this particular royal story. The Sussexes are a commercial enterprise, needing to generate vast sums to pay for their lifestyle in the US, not least their privately funded security bill. Without their royal connection, the Sussexes are just another celebrity couple (and in the US the media has already given them that status) rather than having the sheen of monarchy. If they remain frozen out and nothing changes, they will quickly run out of things to say.

Overshadowing the Coronation Food Project! The Palace’s reaction to briefings about the phone call was telling. Royal insiders say that when the news of the happy birthday call threatened to overshadow media coverage of the launch of the King’s Coronation Food Project, which had been months in the planning, there was irritation bordering on annoyance.

The king leaks that he’s wary of being accused of leaking: “It’s a reflex,” said one royal insider. “The King and Queen worry that if stories about phone calls and private conversations make it into the public domain they will be accused of leaking to the press, even if it’s obvious it didn’t come from them. They just think ‘it’s in the public domain, and public domain equals bad’. Even if this had been the most positive story in the world from the King’s point of view, it would still have generated anxiety for him,” the insider added.

Maybe this mess is coming from Camilla? The Queen’s influence over the King can never be ignored, and she would have every right to be suspicious of Harry and Meghan’s motives after the Duke accused her of “sacrificing me on her personal PR altar” in his memoir Spare at the start of this year.

[From The Telegraph]

Rayner also suggests that Meghan is desperate for a royal connection (lmao) because she’s on the verge of launching a lifestyle brand (lmao), which was a rumor started by bored royalists who are obsessed with Meghan. Let me also say that the long-standing argument that the Sussexes “need” a royal connection has grown more strained by the year. Harry and Meghan are thriving, so much so that the Windsors are desperate for the Sussexes’ star-power, celebrity connections and clout. The Windsors clout-chase the Sussexes, not vice versa.

So, what is really happening here? Part of me thinks that this piece came about because there’s some confusion and disagreement in King Charles’s court. One faction wants to brief about the Sussexes as much as possible to deflect from Charles and Camilla’s unpopularity. Another faction thinks that it’s probably unwise to go on such obvious briefing sprees the second they get any contact from Harry. Whoever assigned Gordon Rayner with cleaning up the palace’s mess didn’t expect him to be so heavy-handed and obvious.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

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

60 Responses to “The Telegraph: The Sussexes leaked all of the ‘birthday phone call’ stories!!”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Breaking News!!! We have lost our minds and will continue to make up unbelievable bull💩 because we were called out on our lie of a birthday invite. Stay tuned for more fantastic fairy tales that will put The Brothers Grim to shame.

    • Concern Fae says:

      This so reminds me of some neighbors who would gossip about someone we rarely saw. First session or two probably had some good theories, but then the need for conversation just kept spinning the discussion way beyond any actual evidence.

    • swaz says:


      • Christine says:

        These people are all so fucking tiresome.

        Guess what, Salty Isle, if the Sussexes were leaking to anyone, they would be ALL OVER the American tabloids and magazines.

        I went to Ralph’s a couple of days ago, and the only “royal story” was about King Chuck being close to death, on the cover of one tabloid.

  2. equality says:

    “The fact that the Palace does not deny there was a call means we can safely assume that there was indeed a conversation.” Wait, what happened to the claim that the RF never explains and can’t comment on certain things? H&M don’t need the “sheen” of monarchy; they have the “sheen” of doing good and caring. I still think PH’s “sheen” from association with his mum is worth far more than any association with the rest. If they wanted the association with monarchy so badly they would have gritted their teeth and stayed. This sounds like a big excuse and a way to say that KC’s food launch wasn’t exciting enough to cover and nobody cared so we have to blame PH.

    • Jais says:

      Right? That piece of logic makes no sense. How can they safely assume that the conversation must be true if the royals “never explain.” They would technically then not correct the validity of a conversation if there wasn’t one. This whole story is so fishy.

      • BlueNailsBetty says:

        Right? The royals didn’t tell us it did not happen so we must assume it happened…is a bizarre “logic”.

    • Ginger says:

      That part just proved that they made it up and since the palace didn’t deny it it must be true. They are so obvious,

    • TigerMcQueen says:

      Right about that sheen. Harrys “sheen” is 1) he’s Diana’s son, 2) he’s Diana’s son in every sense of the word, aka he has her charisma and her empathy, 3) he did what she wasn’t able to do, he not only told Charles ‘no thanks,’ he LEFT that salty isle and proved he doesn’t need it. If he doesn’t step foot in the UK again, he will always have that sheen.

    • Robert Phillips says:

      That’s what I never understand. The press always claims that H&M are always overshadowing things the Royals do. But isn’t it the press themselves that put out the H&M stories? If they didn’t cover them. Or lets be real. Make them up. They wouldn’t overshadow. But they also wouldn’t have readers. And I’ll be honest. I didn’t read spare. But from what I got. It wasn’t the Royals that Harry went the hardest on. It was the courtiers and the press. Yet we never see any stories about that from the British tabloids.

  3. Brassy Rebel says:

    Harry and Meghan need the “sheen” of monarchy? It’s the “taint” of monarchy for most of the civilized world. And here we go again with the accusations that they are overshadowing some performative royal event that absolutely no one cares about or would be aware of anyway.

    • Dee(2) says:

      I will never understand this argument from the British media and from royalists. Do they not realize that the vast majority of people that support Harry and Meghan support them in spite of their connection to royalty, especially that family, not because of? This idea that the people in the US that love them do so because they are ardent royalists and overlook that they have a horrible relationship with the royal family makes absolutely no sense.

  4. Cessily says:

    Love watching them continue to dig their own grave… and by them I mean that family and their highly “visible” contracted media team.

  5. Amy Bee says:

    After Harry called out the Palace for lying to the Sunday Times and the Telegraph about the invitation to Charles’ party, there was no way that they could have gone back to Roya and Camilla Tominey with the story about the phone call, hence the BBC was briefed instead. I agree with Kaiser that there seems to two factions in the Palace. Plus if Meghan was so desperate for the royal connection, she would have gone to the coronation. The Palace and the press are still upset that she didn’t attend that freakshow. I believe after Harry denied the invitation story, the Palace asked Harry to call Charles for his birthday.

    • EasternViolet says:

      I wonder if this is Camilla’s people vs Charles, or Old guard vs New. I don’t know if there are courtiers from QEII still around… funny how the men in grey don’t get name checked very often.

  6. Miranda says:

    Meghan has 2 children with the son of the reigning King. Like, unless she literally had herself sewn to her husband, I’m not sure how she could possibly be more royally connected than that.

    Just say it: Meghan, Archie, and Lili are simply not considered valid members of the royal family.

    • Ciotog says:

      Harry is still 5th in line! If the Cambridges are still traveling together, an accident could make Harry the heir. (I’m not saying I’m wishing for one. Just that William used to travel with the kids and a tragedy would have taken out the FK, FFK, and the two in line before Harry.)

  7. Ameerah M says:

    Meghan DOES have royal connections – she’s friends with BEYONCE. Queen Bey herself.

  8. Eurydice says:

    Omg, don’t these factions have anything better to do? Like actually publicize Charles’ Coronation Food Project? And why is a clean-up even necessary? Nobody is denying that Harry, Meghan and the kids wished Charles a happy birthday. Lots of people wished him a happy birthday. William posted some photos, Harry made a phone call, what is there to brief about?

    The only interesting crumb in all of this is that Harry has tried to call Charles on every birthday. We know Harry wouldn’t tell this to the Telegraph, so who would and why? None of this makes any sense – it sounds like they’re making things up to cause trouble.

  9. Elizabeth Kerri Mahon says:

    It cracks me up that the palace leaks that they are concerned about people leaking! There is no way that Harry and Meghan would authorize anyone to leak to the Sun newspaper. Doesn’t Murdoch own that rag? The rag that Dan Wootten once worked for?

    • Brassy Rebel says:

      The palace has become so leaky they are now drowning in their own leaks. The leaks have become a gusher!

    • Shawna says:

      If BP knows it’s own leaking is out of control (chaotic, contradictory), that is interesting.

    • Jais says:

      It actually really bothers me that someone leaked and is claiming that someone from sussex camp leaked. Harry would have no problem going on the record to say he called his dad if that’s what he wanted to share.

      • Nerd says:

        Yeah, it makes no sense to say that Harry’s camp leaked it to a tabloid that he refuses to associate with and is suing. It makes even less sense that he would leak something like that in the first place especially since he confirmed there was no invitation by putting out a statement just last week. There would be no reason for him to leak this but every reason in the world for the always leaking palaces to leak this.

      • They’re trying to goad Harry into responding to them and denying the whole thing on the record, so they can then use THAT against him. I suspected as much after reading the original BS story yesterday, but now with this response it’s extremely obvious.

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      Yes @ Elizabethe Keri Mahon, The Sun is owned by Murdoch group. He is not leaking to them or the others. That includes the BBC.

      Agree @And Away I Go, from the immortal song Paradise by the Dashboard Lights, They’re almost daring them to try to pick him off.”. (yes, I know what that song is really about). The BM wants Harry to respond, like you and others have said.

      Every day might be a fishing day for the BM, not every day is a catching day for them. Not my words. Borrowed them. H&M are elusive fishies. (my words & intentional misspelling)

  10. olivia says:

    Shame they can’t sue them for this in the UK.

  11. SussexWatcher says:

    I actually feel bad for anyone who lacks the bare minimum of critical thinking skills and would believe this nonsense.

    The idea of it coming from Camp Sussex makes no sense whatsoever. Harry and Meghan have flat out stated, on record, that they will not work with any tabloid media. So, no they are not dropping tips to The Sun. They have also always made statements on the record and with someone’s name attached. So, no they are not leaking stories anonymously. And also, they’re not even the main beneficiaries of this stupid story about the phone call and the video of Archie and Lili Diana. So, no they are not the ones stepping on their own media cycle (as if anyone cares about king Chuckles’s birthday).

    And, that’s not even to mention the most obvious part – Harry and Meghan left that trash family and have never looked back. They’re just not that into you. They’re thriving and happy without you. They’re rolling in money. They are never coming back!

    The British press, RRs, and the palace (and everyone inside it) are SO STUPID. As is anyone believing the Sussexes leaked these stories.

  12. Tessa says:

    Yet there was princess keen with her so called speech getting headlines and is not called out for updating. And harry and Meghan won’t be lured back .

  13. sparrow says:

    Those photos of Meghan are lovely but also slightly sad to me – I’m sure she was wearing some kind of protection under the top half of that coat.

    • MoxyLady007 says:

      Agree. She’s obviously wearing something. And she obviously wore the protection to the fittings to make it as stream lined as possible.

      I can’t imagine having to wear an actual bullet proof vest to a family gathering.

  14. Zut Alors says:

    Why are they so obsessed with the Sussexes finances? They’re not on the public dole, so mind your business.

  15. Lauren says:

    I wonder if the Palace was expecting all the stories about the call to include Charles big food project launch as well and now they are annoyed the reports didn’t include that aspect of the brief

  16. Harla A Brazen Hussy says:

    The BM are screaming that “Prince Harry’s biography “ is whatever, do they have no reading comprehension or are they hedging their bets that their readers don’t? The twisting of facts is truly astounding and the reality of how many people take this as fact is disturbing.

  17. Ace says:

    I can’t wait until the Sussex include the Torygraph in the tabloids they don’t have any contact with. I know they’re friendly with journalists who write for them but there’s no difference between the Telegraph and the Daily Mail and nobody who still writes for that rag can change it.

    • Proud Mary says:

      Ditto! I dong care if Harry’s friends with Briana wants-her-face. Move the F on from the Torygragh. And same for People and Hello Magazines, the double dippers. Seriously, I which Harry and Meghan would go the Oprah route and publish their own shite. But the British media is so dishonest and desperate for news a bout this couple that I can see the number of lying *ss headlines that would generated by the likes of Daily-eff-off, from any such publication.

  18. Mary Pester says:

    The British press has lost its freaking mind! Every right thinking person on the planet KNOWS this bullsht is coming from the Palace! I saw a headline in the Daily Mirror today that got me so bloody angry I have sent THEM a stinking email, but, I have also made an official complaint to IPOS the independent press complaints body! “IT read” Harry and Megans book!!! Not Omid Scobies book, but Harry and Megan’s, just to stir the sht, and it claimed Megan’s picture was released to overshadow as was this. Like I told them, if THEY and the rest of the British press didn’t print rubbish about harry and meghan everyday,nothing would be overshadowed and the people in the UK wouldn’t see it, but they can’t afford not to because the Royal family are now so boring that the press would soon go out of business because circulation would fall, didn’t they learn their lesson by being called out on their lies last week?
    Charlie boy, you should have fixed the roof on camzillas wing in the summer, because once again it’s leaking like a sieve. And if Kate wasn’t so bland and was able to deliver a speech people and experts, wouldn’t be ignoring her

    • ArtFossil says:

      I know, right? The Daily Mail also characterizes Endgame as Scobie’s “biography of Harry and Megan” and a “biography about the Sussexes.” The lies just continue 24/7.

  19. Athena says:

    They’re trying to get a response from Harry. They got one when they ran the birthday invite story so they thought Harry would respond to the story about a call when he didn’t they decided to accuse the Sussexes of leaking the story. The last time they accused the Sussexes of leaking a story was a story related to Meghan’s letter to Prince Charles and Meghan’s team responded, so they’re hoping the same will happen. Good on Harry and Meghan for ignoring them this time.

  20. tamsin says:

    Bottom line is I can’t see Harry and Meghan trusting images of their children to Charles. How petty of Charles to point out that he doesn’t take Harry’s birthday calls. It’s hard to believe that Harry would ask his children to sing Happy Birthday to someone who they don’t know. It would be more believable if Harry played a recording of the children singing Happy Birthday, but surely they would try to leak that as proof. This has become Birthday Gate.

  21. Unblinkered says:

    It’s a clumsy leak(s) as outlined above, what about Carol Debtor Middleton having been responsible?
    KM was hoping to grandstand with her speech yesterday, but all she managed was page 11, and Carol must be sour as hell at her fall from grace with Party Pieces going bust. The two of them would have been enraged at H&M in touch with Charles?

  22. L4Frimaire says:

    When ridiculous articles like this come out, best thing to do is let them die on the vine. Ignore and ignore. They already said what they had to say about this. They so desperately want engagement from the Sussexes but what is there to say? This whole birthday thing was started by the palace, is stupid, and not worthy of any more attention. Like they really are hoping they’ll get confirmation from the Sussexes that an actual call happened or didn’t but why would they need to do that? The palaces and press once again with the same stupid games and BS.

  23. Bad Janet says:

    And why shouldn’t they “leak” it? The Palace does it literally every day, and everyone knows it. It’s common knowledge that they all have PR teams who go tell the papers to write what the palace wants them to write.

    But I guess Harry still can’t say anything right, huh?

    If this even happened. I couldn’t care less if he leaked the story or not, or if he called that dumb bastard on his birthday.

  24. Chelsea says:

    Th lie that the Sussexes are desperate to be seen close to the monarchy died even for casual observers after the coronation when Meghan didn’t show up and Harry was in such a rush to gtfo that he wore his full morning suit to the airport and was pictured with a hanger even though royalists spent months saying the Sussexes would be desperate to be seen at all of the coronation events. Meghan not stopping in to the UK on the way to the Invictus Games and the stupid stories claiming Harry snubbed Balmoral makes it even less believable.

  25. Saucy&Sassy says:

    They really thought that as long as it isn’t the acknowledge tabloid bm writing this stuff that Harry would respond as he did last time. They want his engagement soooooo badly. Here’s my guess: the British reporter(?) who lives in that area in California is the source of this. He makes up things once in a while just to keep his hand in.

    The bm are rewriting history again. When the crying story came out, did the palace immediately say, “No, this is wrong”? No, because that’s what they wanted out there. Same with this story. They don’t stay silent when something is true or false and everybody and their brother should know that by now.

    Here’s something I thought about when I read the crap above. It seems there are people who really believe that H&M get the attention they do in the US because they are royals and it’s the ‘royalists’ who like them. They really don’t understand that the VAST majority of the population in the US could care less about the brf. We just don’t care. Yes, it caught some people’s attention when H&M left and ended up in California. The reason now that people are paying attention is because of the work they do. Harry is doing work with the Military/Veterans that is sincere, important and impactful. That all by itself gains peoples’ approval and respect. Look at the other areas where they are working and there is much to respect. Of course, Harry is Princess Di’s son and he is much like her in his compassion and work. That’s what some people in the UK simply don’t get. I don’t think the royals do either. That’s why Wont thinks he can be ‘adored’ by the US–nope, he’s performative and that just doesn’t cut it here.

  26. Susan says:

    Call me thick but I just don’t understand why the British media thinks anyone cares! I mean either Harry called or he didn’t. The only people involved are Harry and Charles. Why does anyone else need to know one way or another? This is the best the tabs can do to drum up clicks? Sad.

  27. Advisor2u says:

    This whole mess is like bad sherlock Holmes stuff. Imagine, this drivel coming from The Torygraph, a so-called serours/ broadsheet paper? And with a father like this …, whatever.

    Harry, give it up already. You know damn well that your father’s court is full of your tabloid enemies and Camilla’s friend. Of course this birthday call was going to be a hot spinning mess.

  28. phlyfiremama says:

    ALL THIS. Over a son calling his father for his birthday. 😂 As has been said so many times before HOW ARE THEY SO BAD AT THIS.

  29. AC says:

    Not surprised they’re being salty esp with this comment:
    “without their royal connection, the Sussexes are another celebrity couple”.
    First of all, they are as obsessed with our celebrities here. And even WK wants to associate themselves with some of our HW A-listers who have a bigger following and are more known to the world than the BRF combined.
    In the US, people respect HMs work, not just because of their royal connections. M has been supporting USO and our troops overseas way before she married into that family, and also has done work with the UN. And HM are still continuing to do their universal service in supporting all veterans/active servicemen/women , and their families with new initiatives. They also work with youth organizations for mental health awareness.
    No one here sees it wrong that they should have their fun as well- going to the Beyoncé or Katy Perry concerts etc.
    They’re living well, work hard, and enjoying life. And some are just very angry about that.

  30. Agreatreckoning says:

    The Sussexes are a commercial enterprise that is a billion dollar industry for the British Media, we need to generate bullshit stories about them to keep that industry going, vast sums to pay for our mortgages. Without the Sussexes engagement, we’re just the b*llshit tabloids who have to write about the leftover royals who are boring af, charisma free and are tax payer funded. The Sussexes are a couple that relate to high profile figures, celebrities and non celebrities (and in the US the media has already given them that status) rather than having lost the “sheen” of the monarchy, they have a successful life away from it in their $23 million, with five hundred bathrooms and trees you can sleep peacefully under mansion. If we, the British Media, remain frozen out and nothing changes, we will quickly run out of things to say. Except, no, we will still make shite up for clicks along with palace sources.”. Fixed it. Please excuse any typos and grammar related things.