Blind Item #11
Apparently there are honorariums or gifts to charity made when a member of this family speaks at an event. However, this alliterate former actress is instead, asking for the money directly so she can give it to several charities herself. Ummm.
Markle
ReplyDeleteNot even the firm can turn a hooker into a housewife!
DeleteYes! Fergie ages ago used to criticise the royals for not giving her enough money. Thats why she worked on other stories and took payments to introduce her husband. Hilarious!
DeleteMeghan Markle?
ReplyDeleteClick bait #2
ReplyDeleteLooks like it's time to feed the trolls. When's the political blind?
ReplyDeleteThere is no business like american ho bidness! Hrh dutchess markle
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletewhat does she even need money for at this point?
ReplyDeleteMeghan is spending more than kate on clothes. She needs to get paid to stay on the best dressed list
Deleteor pension
DeleteWhat kind of expenses do you think the Crown or good ole' Charles wouldn't pay?
Delete@drew I wouldn’t call Meghan well-dressed at all let alone best dressed! For all the millions of pounds she spends on clothing she almost always looks absolutely awful.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteEntry again showing he knows absolutely nothing about the Royals.
ReplyDeleteYour lies about Meghan for clicks are as pathetic as the people who have a pathological hatred for a woman they don't know, based on your lies.
Is she using the money to pay for her IVF or her surrogate?
She’s using it to pay for her multi million pound wardrobe whilst ordinary people are suffering.
DeleteThat's not how any of this works, Enty.
ReplyDeleteShes does have a bangin bod according to those dm yachting pics. I wonder how harry feels about Freckles markle being the hollywood town bicycle
ReplyDeleteNot anymore! Did you see her at Trooping the Color? She looked like a 45 yr old bloated governess! Poor Harry thought he was getting a sex kitten but instead he has wound up with a middle aged matron. No wonder he looks so unhappy with her!
DeletePoor Meghan out of money already
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteShe is spending more $ on clothes than Kate? Her clothes are hideous. I cannot believe Harry isn't appalled every time he walks out the door with her. One fashion miss after another. Even before she got married, her choice of clothes and colors have been so not chic and royal-like. I will go to my death with the memory of that turd-brown cow ship hat she wore to an event. Hopefully, after she returns to the UK from this trip, they will lock her in her home until after the kid-ling arrives. I feel so sorry for her right now. Someone has it out for her and is responsible for these dreadful clothes choices. Where is Alexander McQueen when you need him?!
Dead?
DeleteCow CHIP. Sorry.
ReplyDeleteI just hope she gives their kid a real ghetto name. If it's a boy, Tyrone. If it's a girl, Shantiqua.
ReplyDeleteIm hoping for levitra Windsor if its a girl or shaq Windsor for a boy
DeleteMeghan Markle to Enty: The gift that keeps on giving.
ReplyDeleteYeah, Boo, the poorly-chosen clothes are a mystery, although she does get it right every once in awhile. I think the solid-color green dress and the red dress she wore recently - the one with the tag hanging off the hem - were flattering to her.
ReplyDeleteThe Oscar de la Renta 50s prom dress she wore to an otherwise casual dinner on her last day in Australia, not so much.
The strangest thing is the lack of British designers. Why doesn’t she take some fabulous young urban London designer and make him a star?
She should make the fashion industry her friend. British Vogue now has a black editor in chief, Edward Enninful. Can’t her recommend someone to style her?
why? she is there for the money and glory why care about Brits
DeleteMaybe Mulroney doesn't receive free clothes from British designers?
DeleteMany cdaners read DM to answer the daily blind. No jobs..
ReplyDeleteShe's basically a Sexy Mother Theresa
ReplyDeleteIt could be possible she had a contract with a designer when she acted and it's still in play?
ReplyDeleteMM is making all the media a ton of money, might as well make some herself. I don't think this is true at all. She can't receive anything directly as payment for anything. But then again......panama papers showed there are way and means to hide a little in the biscuit tin / cookie jar that the public or treasury don't get wind of.
ReplyDeleteI think Meghan usually dresses quite well, much better than Kate. Entry had a blind and a podcast explains how she gets her clothes. She gets free clothes from her friends and then submits phony receipts to Prince Charles for reimbursement.
ReplyDeletea podcast THAT explains... sorry for the typo
DeleteCalling BS on this blind.
ReplyDeleteMeghan is playing the old dress well game. Actresses that are not stars with a lot of cash, yet, but like to walk the red carpet, give deposit and then proceed to buy the dress online, don't remove the dress tag b/c after THE EVENT you are going to return it, and collect your money back.
ReplyDelete@Ringo But who is "forging recipients"? It is a serious crime in Britain!
ReplyDeleteI seriously doubt she's running scams so soon out of the gate. The risk of ruining her brand would far outweigh whatever cash she could grab from these charitable donations.
ReplyDeleteIt doesnt matter. Once that baby is born she is set for life!
DeleteMegan is not Sonja Morgan for fuck sake. The tag thing was none of her doing. Whomever helps her dress as fault for that.
ReplyDeleteActually Meghan has had her PR claim that she styles herself and has no outside help so it is her fault. Also surely she has a choice in what she chooses to wear. Yet she manages to get it wrong almost every single time and you can’t say it’s someone else’s fault since she has taken the credit from Jessica Mulroney and claims she styled herself. Not sure why she is trying to take any responsibility for her trainwreck of a wardrobe though.
DeleteSpeaking as someone who absolutely cannot stand Markle, this blind is utter nonsense.
ReplyDeleteThe royals are never, ever paid in any way for giving speeches - not even via a charity. If they were, we (the UK public) would know it because it would legally have to be declared. They are in the service of the nation - everything they do, and receive, is on our behalf. They have to declare when they are gifted a tea towel or an apron - so there is no way that anyone could make a donation on their behalf (which amounts to a gift) without it being declared.
And, even if this were a thing (and it’s not) Markle & Harry wouldn’t have anything at all to do with the admin side. It would go through their staff & woukd have been arranged months in advance.
I don’t have any difficulty believeing that Markle is a right cow when the cameras are off (as there’s evidence of this elsewhere) but getting a cash donation for making a speech while representing the Queen & with the full guidance and support of the Foreign Office - absolutely no way.
I think that the honorariums/gifts are referring to when it’s a personal charity rather than an official royal patronage. I can imagine that in the past MM probably channeled the funds she raised through her personal bank account, but would she be this stupid to continue the pattern post- “I do”?
ReplyDeleteWhen you’re “royal” (and I use that term loosely with Markle) there isn’t anything “personal” anymore. If she (or any of them) use their HRH in any capacity, then it’s on behalf of the Queen. Invictus/Grenfell Cook Book etc aren’t patronages, but neither are they entirely personal...since they are operated under the umbrella of HRH & thus on behalf of the Queen.
ReplyDeleteI really wish people understood the BRF a bit better. If they did they’d know that a lot of claims being made about Markle are impossible. There’s a blog that’s got everyone convinced that she & Harry are “merching” all over the place. This is impossible. KP know exactly where everything they wear in public comes from - because it would be a major scandal if it were shown, or even hinted at, that they were benefitting financially from their positions.
They can accept gifts, but they have to be declared - and lists of the gifts they’ve received is published annually.
I think Markle is a nasty, manipulative, deceitful, narcissistic user who fully deserves to be called out. But she no longer has any opportunity for financial impropriety - unless the KP staff are assisting in the fraud.
The BRF are not zelebs...the Queen is the HoS, and they are representing her everytime you see them. All this “merching” stuff is total tripe. Before the engagement, sure...but not since. (Excuse typos...the print on this blog is very small & I can barely read what I’ve written).
It might be even worse if what you say is true. That would mean that Meghan’s multi-million pound wardrobe is charged to the British taxpayer in its entirety.
DeleteBS as usual, the RF would never allow her to accept the money, they aren't even allowed to accept free clothes from companies or personal gifts from heads of state it all goes through a dedicated 'gift' department for scrutiny, they may be allowed to use the gifts but they are not deemed their personal property (baby toys for instance). The media would be on it like butter on toast. There is strict protocal on these things and it has to go through the Queen if any change is to be made.
ReplyDeleteFunny how Meghan’s stans use the excuse that royals are not allowed to merch and accept free clothing to defend her. Though it is against the rules I’m sure the British taxpayer would prefer that her wardrobe is gifted or borrowed. But apparently Meghan is charging millions of pounds to the Duchy to pay for her ill-fitted, ugly wardrobe and that is even worse.
DeleteYou are missing my point a bit, Do Not Lie. I agree with your analyis of her character & her reasons for marrying Prince Dimwit - but she’s not really failing to comply with protocol in any significant way. She wouldn’t want to either, as she is desperate to be seen as a “real royal” so she’ll do as she’s asked in public. Her natural arrogance comes over, but that’s all.
ReplyDeleteNot wearing tights, crossing her legs wrong, walking before Harry....meh. Trust me, no one much cares about that.
She is NOT ABLE to be financially fraudulent in the way that’s being implied. She does not buy her own clothes...she just chooses them & they get sent to KP. I doubt they even arrive with her name on the parcel. There are a large number of office staff who will be doing everything for her, and any gifts that arrive have to go through them. There’s no way round that.
She probably gets up to all sorts of shady stuff...and I bet Clarence House & BP are keeping a close eye...but she cannot rip anyone off unless he involves the KP staff.
Never read a comment by HAMID when you have a mouth full of mashed potatoes and gravy!!! It will take all night to clean it off my Dell screen!!! Too, too funny! Hope it's a girl and she grows up sucker punching her cousins at Birthday parties!!!
ReplyDeleteHappy to spread laughter.
DeleteI keep lizards in my honorarium.
ReplyDeleteNever underestimate the depths to which a grifting narcissist will stoop. Ever.
ReplyDelete+1 to everything Donmack posted. It's sounds very correct and I'm pretty convinced he knows what he's talking about.
ReplyDeletemaybe shes hedging her bets and saving a nest egg for the future?
ReplyDeleteas wills and kates kids grow up, they will be become the spotlight and heirs ......and then harry and megs kids will end up being the unfortunate cousins (like beatrice ) who will have to make their own way in the world with no income.
if she ends up divorcd like sarah she,ll be essentially pennyless with no prospects to make money because she,ll be too old to yacht
I too had a laugh at Hamid's post!
ReplyDeleteSo PIC!
We could come up with a list of names, just for fun.
I'm gonna start my list, and post it in a MM blind.
@Donmack, I love you. Cheers from Canada!
ReplyDeleteLMAO Hamid!
ReplyDeleteMM is such a fake AF try-hard and so unlikeable. And harry now just looks like her dim-witted servant. Tragic.
Yea..I bet harry doesn't spend his moment on his legally wedded wife...enjoy the kool aide
ReplyDeleteRoyals are not allowed to be paid or accept donations. Their service is free as it is their duty. In return they get to live in a castle and have everything provided by the tax payers money. This is definitely a fake blind.
ReplyDeleteSo Meghan has actually spent the millions of pounds her gross wardrobe is worth with taxpayer’s money? That’s even worse than if she got gifted or borrowed the clothes.
DeleteAlso royals do not really get to choose their childrens names. They are given a shortlist of historic royal names and can choose names from that list only. So there will be no Shaniqua or Tyrones or even a Pedro since she is half Mexican (hehehehehe! Good one Hamid!)
ReplyDeleteOh wow. I did not Know that and that is fascinating.
Delete(That was still a good joke tho Hamid. LOLOLOLLLLOL. Just in terms of trolling Queen Betty—and there is actual evidence she’s racist AF, there was an article listing all the times she called foreign world leaders questionable things—complete with videographic evidence, but curiously now the articles/videos have vanished from the Interwebs? So now I have to say the Queen’s only “ALLEGEDLY” racist because all the proof is gone, and it’s like Harry’s new bride is supposed to prove otherwise... I SEE WHAT YOU DID THERE BETTY.)
See this is why Meghan haters need to take a chill pill. How would you like it if you had to pick your kid’s name from a boring ass list of basic names that’ve been used a gajillion times before? Sometimes with ridiculously impersonal Roman numerals behind them (by the time England goes republic, it’ll be Richard LXXXVIII). There’s nothing to be jealous of. People keep saying Meghan is an “opportunist”, but I get the vibes that the British royal family is using HER too (to appear “modern”, etc). Her life basically sucks now. 🤷🏻♀️
I’ve always wanted to name my kid Durian myself, after The Goop named hers Apple. 👶🏻 (Or “Durianne” if little Scandi Jr. is a girl—maybe add “Hathaway” as a middle name for LULZ, or maybe not... Last time I wanted to name people “Christopher-Robin” [hyphenated] back in 2013–2014 people FREAKED! OUT! at the “Robin” bit for some reason. Weird... 😒 Eh.) I’d never name a girl after “Teh Dark Lady” tho because in my culture it’s very important what you name your children—it’s considered a “prayer/prophecy” (so thank goodness my mother didn’t name me Diana after Meghan‘s late MIL in the end, because look what happened to her—RIP) and I’m not naming any daughter of mine after an “other woman”.
I’ve seen real cases of people naming their child after the Virgin Mary (any variation of it, really—from the Roman “Maria” to the French “Marie”) and the girl becomes an eternal virgin. Who. Just. Can’t. Get. Laid. 😭
Naming your children is so important in my culture that the village people used to consult my grandfather (who was a Village Head before bloody democracy had to happen) prior to deciding on a name for their newborns. It’s very spiritual, the process of a naming a child. (Something about the numerology of the way the Sanskrit letters add up too & whatnot, although IDK much on the details of how that works exactly.)
Picking from a list seems very cold... “What’s today’s special?” she asked the palace butler.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis is only partially true. The direct heir (William) can only choose from an approved list of names for their children hence why his children have traditional names such as George and Charlotte. Non-direct heirs (e.g. Harry and Princess Anne) are allowed to name their children whatever they wish hence why their children have names like Archie and Zara. So no, Scandi, the Meghan “haters” do not need to take “a chill pill”, as the name Archie was not on any pre-approved list. Do you really think names like Zara, Peter and Archie (not Archibald, just Archie) are “historic royal names”? Last I checked there has never been a Queen Zara or King Archie in British history. No, the crappy name Archie is entirely Harry and Meghan’s own doing.
DeleteThis isn’t a lie, SMegma Markle has been merching her relationship to Harry, since before the wedding. What’s more it is illegal in the UK TO merchandise a title or the titles name.
ReplyDelete