Prince Harry and Meghan Markle thread

Toby93

Member
Jun 24, 2013
1,694
1,369
As if James Corden’s opinion is respected! He’s supposed to be the biggest jerk in town. Plus, his meds are 10 years older than the Markles.

James Corden reveals he and Prince Harry's children have play dates


https://mol.im/a/10811435
"He only lives an hour and a half away" :lol: That's a 3 hour round trip for play date. Probably just happened one time.
His kids are 11 & 7 & 4. No 11 year old would want to hang out with a baby and 3 year old.
 
Last edited:

CarryOn2020

Peace
Mar 28, 2020
5,962
47,777

My 2 cents:
It looks like TM knows a lot more than what he is willing to share. He loves his daughter and still has hope they will heal. The comment about TW would have the family she never had was apparently a repeat. It happened also during her marriage to Trevor. Using the pity card was likely a habit of her. TM refuses to talk about the Soho h/yacht girl subject, but in contrast with other things he denied, he just refused to talk about it. Also, he doesn't share all parts of the infamous letter because they are allegedly so hateful. He makes also a reference to SS…
Excellent interview. Agree, he knows lots more than he has shared.
TM says yes to a divorce. Also, he reveals that MM wrote another book about having 2 of everything [since her parents were divorced]. So, brace yourselves - 2 on 2 may be in the works. :eek:

RE: her hair - watch this story. My guess it is about to get much uglier with some very loaded accusations. Just my opinion.

ETA: wonder if he has been advising MM. Ya know, through unnamed sources, etc. The public spats could be just for show.
Guessing the BRF knows the truth. :thinking:
 
Last edited:

Chanbal

Member
Aug 18, 2012
11,087
62,904
World
Excellent interview. Agree, he knows lots more than he has shared.
TM says yes to a divorce. Also, he reveals that MM wrote another book about having 2 of everything [since her parents were divorced]. So, brace yourselves - 2 on 2 may be in the works. :eek:

RE: her hair - watch this story. My guess it is about to get much uglier with some very loaded accusations. Just my opinion.

ETA: wonder if he has been advising MM. Ya know, through unnamed sources, etc. The public spats could be just for show.
Guessing the BRF knows the truth. :thinking:
Everything is possible at this point.
think §768.295 is the statute number … she will probably ask for a lot more, knowing her :rolleyes:
Oh yes! In this case, they are not calling the First Amendment 'bonkers'… It's disgusting. :annoyed:

It's possible that SM is being helped, her new team of lawyers is fit for a (ex) President. :lol:

"In the motion to dismiss filed Friday, Meghan’s lawyers denied all of Markle’s allegations — and stated that even if they were true, the duchess's half-sister would still have no case: first, because the statements that Meghan made about Markle in her 2018 briefing email to Knauf were made outside of Florida’s two-year statute of limitations for defamation; second, because Meghan didn’t write Finding Freedom; and finally, because Meghan’s statements about her half-sister in the email and in the Oprah interview are substantially true — and protected by the First Amendment. The filing included an itemized list of responses to all 17 of the statements that Samantha Markle claimed were defamatory.

The motion’s request that Markle be compelled to pay Meghan’s legal fees is based on a Florida law that prohibits lawsuits filed against individuals who are exercising their right to free speech in connection with public issues."


1652501855695.png


 

jelliedfeels

Member
Feb 28, 2021
2,048
16,267
It's what he doesn't say that stands out to me. He says what a great guy Harry is, but he doesn't say anything specifically about MM, like she is warm and charming, great with the kids, etc. I'm neutral on him, have only watched his show occasionally over the years. I know he is viewed with disdain by many, but I don't understand why. Care to enlighten me?
I feel it’s an open secret at this point that most of these hosts are awful people - the only safe bets are Graham Norton and maybe Conan.
JC’s sense of humour is grating for me personally and he can be rude even to his guests but a lot of Brits don’t like him because he was in a comedy duo and they think he abandoned his partner and even sabotaged their projects so he could go to LA ASAP so there’s certainly some bad blood there.
This is truly unbelievable… :amazed:
it’s offensive to freedom of speech and it’s offensively hammy too. Apparently chilling is now defined as ‘my bitter b*tch sister called me a bitter b*tch’ when will the horrors end :rolleyes:


Compassion in action!
What’s the tweet? it’s been deleted
Everything is possible at this point.


Oh yes! In this case, they are not calling the First Amendment 'bonkers'… It's disgusting. :annoyed:

It's possible that SM is being helped, her new team of lawyers is fit for a (ex) President. :lol:

"In the motion to dismiss filed Friday, Meghan’s lawyers denied all of Markle’s allegations — and stated that even if they were true, the duchess's half-sister would still have no case: first, because the statements that Meghan made about Markle in her 2018 briefing email to Knauf were made outside of Florida’s two-year statute of limitations for defamation; second, because Meghan didn’t write Finding Freedom; and finally, because Meghan’s statements about her half-sister in the email and in the Oprah interview are substantially true — and protected by the First Amendment. The filing included an itemized list of responses to all 17 of the statements that Samantha Markle claimed were defamatory.

The motion’s request that Markle be compelled to pay Meghan’s legal fees is based on a Florida law that prohibits lawsuits filed against individuals who are exercising their right to free speech in connection with public issues."


View attachment 5403004


I hope Samantha is getting bankrolled as M has had the full power of the BRF for her nuisance suits. It’s all so incredibly spurious. What’s good for the goose…
Fingers crossed S gets a nice wad of notes out of it. She could even buy a Valentino dress that actually fits her!
 

xincinsin

TEAM SCARF MISTRESS 2022
Jul 8, 2015
6,442
61,953
Escapee from BAN
What, actually, does that mean? It sounds so pretentious! Usually, there are two parents who manage together. It seems to suggest that the parents can't/won't take responsibility for raising their child/children and expect others to help?

I don't know, just seems a load of old word salad to me! :-s
It is derived from African proverbs. When I was doing ethnography courses, I read about how in some African villages/tribes, raising children was a communal task. All adults looked out for and helped take care of the children. What particularly stuck in my mind was how the nursing mothers would allow any infant or toddler to suckle, not only their own offspring. Orphaned children were taken care of by the entire village.

This is definitely not an attitude I'd associate with Methane and her No Free Milk motto in life, apart from the expectation she has that the "village" should pay for her to lead a life of luxury.
 

Chanbal

Member
Aug 18, 2012
11,087
62,904
World
Even with little time to spare, many of us will come to this thread. So I'm sharing this beautiful story here; its relation to this thread has to do with Big Will, a main target of the Harkles.

 

xincinsin

TEAM SCARF MISTRESS 2022
Jul 8, 2015
6,442
61,953
Escapee from BAN
Even with little time to spare, many of us will come to this thread. So I'm sharing this beautiful story here; its relation to this thread has to do with Big Will, a main target of the Harkles.

I read about Bowelbabe. I really respect her. She was one of 3 women hosting a programme called You, Me and the Big C. One of her co-hosts has already passed away from cancer. No fake compassion here. They are the real deal.