Blind Items Revealed #5
March 22, 2019
I told you many months ago that the sex tape existed that has the alliterate former actress turned married celebrity. That has now been confirmed by an A list celebrity sex tape broker who has seen the video and is publicly speaking about it.
Meghan Markle
I told you many months ago that the sex tape existed that has the alliterate former actress turned married celebrity. That has now been confirmed by an A list celebrity sex tape broker who has seen the video and is publicly speaking about it.
Meghan Markle
lol.
ReplyDeleteWho's she with? Charles? James Hewitt?
You should have saved this for another day the DM'ers are out celebrating Brexit today bwahahahaha
ReplyDeleteThis is gonna be a fun thread ...
ReplyDeleteWhen will it cum out? Asking for a friend.😒
ReplyDeleteDid hell freeze over yet, that's when it gets released.
ReplyDeleteCharles and James Hewitt?
ReplyDeletePlus a few corgies?
Supposedly she is tossing the gentleman's salad in the video.
ReplyDeleteI wonder who was chosen to explain that activity to the Queen.
Nutty is that FOR REALZ?
DeleteI thought someone was just making a vegan joke? 🥗
Didn't the Royals pay 10 mil to keep it under wraps? Someone is getting suicided.
ReplyDelete@Nutty no wonder Harry is so "besotted" with her. (UK sites love to use that word.) I thought she was on her knees giving the usual bj. Ten million is a drop in the bucket to what this video is worth on porn sites. It will clear half a billion or more. Charles better up The Firm's offer quickly.
ReplyDeleteI'm surprised anyone pays off blackmailers in the digital age. No matter how much you pay, there's bound to be another copy out there.
ReplyDeleteSupposedly the Duchess is indeed on her knees in this video, and the gentleman has his legs in the air, in the classic baby-being-diapered position.
Ugh what a visual. BTW Nutty, love your blog...it's my go-to for the real scoop on the RF
DeleteThough I do enjoy my glossy HELLO!, but just for the pics--no real dirt on those pages
Paging MI6....
ReplyDeleteGood morning 007 ..... your mission this morning is to procure a tape and eliminate all who have seen it.
Oh no. Now I know I'm officially old bc I have no idea what "tossing a gentleman's salad" means. Eek!!! It had to happen at some point.....
ReplyDeleteLOVE that enty has ratings for sex-tape brokers!🤣
ReplyDeleteWho is A-list Steve Hirsch at Vivid?
Dear Unknown being truly old I've learned that searching with "urban slang and (whatever term you're looking for)" provides most answers. It comes in handy on this site.
ReplyDelete"tossing the salad
It's a prison thing. Lower inmates are forced to lick the assholes of the leading inmates, but they put salad dressing on it to hide the taste. Hence, tossing the salad."
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=tossing+the+salad "
@Nonya Kevin Blatt did the interview. He released Kim Kardashian and Paris Hilton's sex tapes. So he is indeed A list for his profession.
Here's where it was confirmed:
ReplyDeletehttps://21stcenturystate.com/2019/03/22/secret-meghan-markle-sex-tape-offered-for-sale-online-video/
Now we know the skills she used to hook Harry. My advice is to make many secret copies. This is a goldmine in the making. Considering her past, she was pretty brazen not taking herself out of the running a long time ago. One's past has a way of catching up with one. *pops popcorn*
ReplyDeleteThank you Ann!!!! Yuck!!! This brings me back to the days a coworker informed me what "rimming" was (around 30 years ago). When I responded with an "ew", he says "Don't knock it 'til you've tried it."
ReplyDeleteI'm reading From Fergie to Fudgie, a History of Useless Royal Spouses
ReplyDeleteDear Unknown, I have stopped looking up sex slang. Whatever you do, never EVER press on images.
ReplyDeletesure
ReplyDeleteHonestly doubtful, she looks like a lot of bi-racial women. Although come on she ain't no saint, but she ain't stupid either.
ReplyDeleteTOTAL BREXSH*TS MPs throw out May’s deal for third time – Brexit now faces death or a delay of years
ReplyDeletehttps://www.thesun.co.uk/news/brexit/8745465/brexit-deal-result-theresa-may-house-of-commons/
The elite were never gonna let Brexit happen😠 the eurocracy is where UK politicians really get there snouts in the trough, no way there gonna give that up.
Delete@Thursday: She’ll do anything for money. (Or haven’t you seen the BJ scene in 90210?) Or the topless video that she took of herself. She has a new movie coming out about sex and drugs (I can’t remember the name of it.) Supposedly an anonymous buyer is releasing it. Really everything she’s ever done (besides maybe a Hallmark movie) is about using her body.
ReplyDeleteHey if it's her and a boyfriend who cares, it's supposed to be from years ago. If it's a business thing then yikes.
ReplyDeleteThank you Sandy for letting me laugh out loud today!
ReplyDeleteBwa ha haaa haa!
People who tape and don't retain sole possession before they destroy it deserve everything they get.
ReplyDeleteToday's love of your life is tomorrow's get away from me before I file a restraining order
@Brayson it was with a photographer. So MM probably just needed some new head shots and was trading services. Seriously it would take Jeff Bezos bank account to bury that woman's past.
ReplyDelete@Ann +1 LOL RE: Bezos Bank Account. Maybe she can be convinced to chase him!
ReplyDeleteI mean let's be honest here: in the grand scheme of scandals in the Windsor family, a sex tape from the spare's wife is hardly on the radar. They'll pay for it not to come out, but I bet even if it gets released, they'll clutch pearls for 5 minutes and move on.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the advice @Depeche Model - clicking on IMAGES after "gentleman's salad" or "rimming" might be enough to bring on an end of life event for like me in my advanced age (56)!!!!
ReplyDeleteMarkle is Brexit distraction .
ReplyDeleteStop the distraction.
You are feeding the nonsense, Enty.
The UK people need A NEW LEADER . They voted to leave THE EU, they voted THREE YEARS AGO.
ENOUGH.
Of course she does. Probably intentional.
ReplyDeleteAnyone else seen the newest blind at Blind Gossip? OMG if it's true there's hell to pay.
ReplyDeleteWow that's a biggie.
ReplyDeletehttps://blindgossip.com/pregnancy-bombshell/#more-98321
I think it was Flashy Vic who joked about this. Wow. Given-er the portion!
My brain just unfroze from the shock. Monday is April 1st and BG always does a big April's Fools joke every year. Could this be their big April Fool's joke this year? I hope so. I wouldn't put anything past MM but I'd be really disappointed in William and heartbroken for Harry/Kate.
ReplyDeleteIt has to be a joke. Big important news like that and only BG has the official statement. It would be juicy if it was real
DeleteYOU GUYS! Possible??? https://blindgossip.com/pregnancy-bombshell/
ReplyDeleteOh. Nm. It's April fools. Dammit.
ReplyDeleteIt’s not April Fool’s Day yet CinnyToast.
DeleteAnd I don’t think it counts if someone plants “seeds” on March 29 only to “reveal” it as a hoax on April 1. The prank must be administered on April 1 or it is invalid, ask a prank lawyer. 👩🏻⚖️🐈
In other news, I saw Irish film “The Hole in the Ground” (total “The Shining” homage, by the way) at the cinema the other day. 🥤🍿 And on a whim booked a seat for “Us” on April Fool’s Day to celebrate.
NB: Not to be crass and pry into other people’s salaries, but do the actors in “Us” get paid double?
I miss my mother. Before she moved away to live at my maternal granny’s, we used to have a “prank face-off” every April Fool’s Day.
DeleteLast time I think she won 2-1 boo.
@E--I've subscribed to Hello! for years! My first issue was of William and Catherine's engagement. How's that for timing?
ReplyDeleteThe blind on BlindGossip is a complete set up for April Fool's Day. NO WAY that is real.
And, thanks for the education on "tossing salad". That's knowledge I could have lived without!! Ranch flavored asshole. Seriously?
Euw. There’s no ACTUAL dressing involved, is there? I mean I’ve heard about nekkid sushi restaurants (I think there was an episode on “Billions” too).
DeleteIf it’s Caesar (my fave) I’m going to set-up a Meghan hate site. 🥗
Get out of here with the “UK elite” and “Brexit distractions”. Brexit is a fucking calamity waiting to happen, irrespective of who the PM is.
ReplyDeleteNot sure when the term "tossing salad" originated, but I first heard of it on a Chris Rock HBO special over a decade ago. Tom Brady has referred to the NFL off-season as Ass-Eating Season.
ReplyDeleteThe BG blind is DEFINITELY an April Fool's joke. Just watch.
ReplyDeleteAnd Brexit is the dumbest thing to ever happen...assuming it does.
@see kay the biggest voter turnout in UK history voted to EXIT.The prime minister's duty is to carry out what the voters VOTED.
ReplyDeleteThree years later...nothing.
Commonwealth also voted.
The British Commonwealth includes 53 countries. Two point four billion humans.
But yeah.
Keep chitty chatting about some hooker from California, and her little tape.
That's real important.
@Do Not Lie:
ReplyDeletewell it doesn't count because no self-respecting prankster would start pranking before April 1 00:00.
I"M OUTRAGED
I read the blind gossip comments and it’s sad how many people believed it was true. This is bad timing to use this as an April Fool’s blind. At first I thought MM sent it in.
ReplyDelete@Aquagirl, I've wondered that. BG have given her shout outs in the past, along the lines of " because we know you read this, Meghan ", which to me suggests she has sent blinds in herself. Now this, well this would be her way of creating unrest, disguised as a bit of fun. But her intentions would be far from "fun". It's already got all the MM stans whooping with delight on Twitter. To be honest, I'm no prude, but I think it's bloody disgusting, considering the current climate of all things RF related.
ReplyDelete@Aquagirl, they'll all claim they didn't think it was true as soon as the reveal comes on Monday. There will be some furious backpedalling.
ReplyDelete@Daryl, most people are quite capable of holding more than one idea in their minds at a time. Brexit's success or failure will not be eclipsed by Duchess Meghan's hijinks.
New blog entry:
"Meghan's pregnancy: What happens in April? Five scenarios, from best to worst"
Available via my profile.
@Nutty the thing though is the BG blind is totally believable behavior for Meghan. That's what caused my shock when I first read it. I would put nothing past this wh*re. She's used every man she's ever dated or married to better herself. Then she has the audacity to call herself a feminist. If anyone wonders why I detest Meghan now you know. This old feminist takes offense at this tosser. The problem though is through her duplicity with this blind she's sowing doubt about William's character and marriage. William is the future king of England. This isn't funny. It's the very definition of high treason. At the least, considering William will very soon control all of Meghan and Harry's finances she's absolutely stupid. William's ascension to the Prince of Wales means every dime she gets will be at William's discretion. This little war of hers with the Cambridges isn't winnable. No wonder Harry looks so unhappy and stressed all the time. The stress of being married to her is going to kill him. Now that I've had my say I'm off to read your blog.
ReplyDeleteAttention is Narcissist Food.
ReplyDeleteIf anyone really wanted Markle to go away, they would stop clicking on all the gossip.
Start asking a more important question :
Why can't the so called prime minister handle a negotiation and carry out what the people voted for three years ago?
I stopped reading BG after last year's "April fools" started about a week before (like this) and only ended with a knee slapping "reveal" a few days later.
ReplyDeleteBut I abhor stupid humor and think practical jokes are for imbeciles, so...
Ooooh, look at you being all high-brow calling people “imbeciles”.
DeleteI totally agree @DarylsbigFan and @rosie riveter.
ReplyDeleteSo very well said @Ann.
ReplyDeleteForbes published a good piece about the Meg drama today and also deleted it today.
ReplyDeleteWonder who was behind the sudden deletion.
Anyway, the good ladies at Lipstick Alley cut and pasted the article while it was live, so here it is again. Thank you ladies.
Unfortunately, the embdded links do not paste onto Blogger.
-------------
Meghan Markle: Does The British Tax Payer Know How Much 'Me-Gain' Royal Is Costing?
The Duchess of Sussex, aka Meghan Markle, is watching her popularity and acceptance sinking, possibly taking the British Royal Family with her. Apparently, the way to make the public in Britain like her is to spend tax-payers money on PR machines on both sides of the Atlantic, in addition to a generous allowance.
Being in the public eye puts a person under a degree of scrutiny - and especially when you are a Royal. Some voluntarily choose the public eye, and some are born into it.
Just last weekend (March 23) in The Express tabloid it was reported that royal expert, Anna Pasternak, ventured that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's marriage is "going to become increasingly difficult."
The author of 'Untitled: The Real Wallis Simpson, Duchess of Windsor’, Pasternak claimed that the Duchess is heading into a “tricky situation” - akin or similar to that faced by Wallis Simpson and Princess Diana, where the "ultimate goal is survival." Strong stuff. Like Simpson, Markle is a divorcee.
The most famous marriage of royalty to entertainment was in 1956 when Grace Kelly, the American film actress, became Princess of Monaco after marrying Prince Rainier III in April of that same year.
One of the most famous actresses in the world at the time, armed with a stable of films for which she received high acclaim, plus an Academy Award for Best Actress (1955) tucked under her arm, retired from acting at the age of 26 and began (shade :bashful )her duties as the Princess of Monaco.
According to reports, Princess Grace was loved and accepted by the public during her lifetime, and when she died at the age of 52, according to biographer Jeffrey Robinson, “…it was like the lights went out. Monaco just stopped.”
Move forward to 2018, where another actress has married into a royal family - this time, in the United Kingdom (U.K), which has for the last three years been torn apart by ongoing Brexit trials and tribulations. The tension in the country is palpable.
Meghan Markle, a relatively small-time actress say some (shady boots) , married Prince Harry of Wales on May 19, 2018, at St George's Chapel, Windsor Castle.
Although not so well known prior to this - her second marriage - she was best known for a small role in a series named Suits. Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex and sixth in line to thrown, on the other hand, was the younger son of one of the most famous Royals in history, Princess Diana of Wales, and known throughout the world due to his Royal status. His Royal Highness spent ten years working in the Armed Forces, ending operational duties in 2015.
Meghan Markle, who grew up in a middle-class household, was looked after by her family throughout her life. When her father won the lottery when she was nine years old, he seemingly made sure that every cost was covered for Meghan, sending her to the best schools and training. Well, why not if you have it.
(continued)
ReplyDeleteOf course, Prince Harry grew up as a Royal, and unlike his brother Prince William, seemed to like the partying side of life a little more. As his Royal Highness grew up he was in the papers often, normally for partying in Las Vegas or some other antics. But he knew the price of being in the public eye and putting a foot out of place. Yet he is 100% British and the public love him, still, regardless of these reports.
There was finally an announcement in November of 2017 that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry were engaged, which was soon followed by an interview, which was the start of Meghan’s decent.
During this interview, Meghan proclaimed that she did not know much about Prince Harry, and because she was American, did not really understand the importance of the Royal family - although she was snapped in a photo in front of Buckingham palace when she was 15 and apparently had many books on Diana and the royal family, according to reports.
All of this gave fuel to the British public, who started to leave negative remarks in the comments sections of online publications by the hundreds, if not thousands.
At Meghan and Prince Harry’s wedding, on May 19, 2018, there were no family present from her side, except for her mother, in sharp contrast to the marriage of Catherine Middleton and Prince William of Wales, the now Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.
Meghan’s wedding received widespread attention for the lack of family and close friends. Prince Charles gave her away, although her own father is alive and living in Mexico, and she had her own shadow as a Maid of Honor. Again, the British public were left puzzled, as seen by the comments in the media.
Of course, with their exclusion from this great event, Meghan’s own family took great exception, with the most vocal being Samantha Markle - followed by her father, uncles and cousins - who could not understand why this happened. And, they never got an answer. But they had a clue when Prince Harry went on the radio and said that the Royal family would now be the “family Meghan never had.”
Meghan’s family shot back immediately that this was all a lie, protesting and offering proof of the opposite. Samantha even explained that the father financed all of Meghan’s education, while Meghan stated at a conference she paid for her own education. Yet Samantha has receipts from the father, apparently.
At the same time, reports of the cost of this wedding, mixed with the drama of the Markle family, hit fever pitch. According to the British tabloid, the Express, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's Royal wedding is said to have racked up a £32 million bill (c.$41.6 million at the current exchange rate), with the majority of that hefty sum (paid for by the British taxpayer) going towards security - a whopping £30 million (c.$39 million), to be exact.
(continued)
ReplyDeleteAccording to reports, even Prince William and Catherine observed the negative publicity, fearing it will outshine the work and legacy of the Royal Family as a whole, and wanted to separate themselves from what has been labelled “the Markle Effect.”
Meghan Markle’s PR chief moved positions and became the fifth aide she has lost since she married Prince Harry. According to The Sun, Jason Knauf is now a “senior adviser” for the Cambridges' charities. In addition, the general consensus among royal reporters is that Meghan is seen as difficult and high energy and is said to “snap” at palace employees.
Following this move, and the desire to separate the Sussexs’ from the Cambridges’, according to The Daily Mail The Queen agreed to the creation of a Household for The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and gave permission for it to be based at Buckingham Palace.
As part of the new order, Harry and Meghan have named Sara Latham, Hillary Clinton’s former Senior Campaign Advisor, as their new dedicated head of communications.
With costs estimated and thought to be in the ball park of £500,000 to £1 million (c.$650,000 to $1.3 million), it will be paid for by the tax payer. The ultimate irony. They are spending tax-payers money to make the Duchess of Sussex likeable to the very people who are not warming to her, by spending their money.
(Note from Nutty: love that last line!)
(continued)
ReplyDeleteViscount Yves de Contades, CEO of International Excellence Magazine and luxury expert remarking on these recent matters, said: “Relating to populist media through PR experts has become indispensable, because if you are not talking to them directly, they will simply take it from any source - however unreliable.”
He added: “Unfortunately sensational stories get read substantially more than the truth. Good PR is about maintaining certain values and connecting honestly with your audience. And, it would be wise to pay those bills yourself.”
Frank Marr, CEO and owner of A Marr + Associates and a reputation management/PR expert based in London, said: "Reputation management is imperative for the monarchy. In an era of discontent, erratic political situations along with the big gap between the rich and the poor, there has never been a more important need to explain why the royalty is needed for the nation."
He added: "Their role as pillars to society and how they can play their part to support the nation [Britain] needs to be managed in order to maintain reasoning for this existence of influence."
Is this really the right approach?
According to inside sources, who like Meghan’s friends cannot be named, Royal Communications have a very lucrative deal with People Magazine in America. The reason? Apparently, they feel if Americans fall in love with her, then the Brits will naturally follow.
(continued)
ReplyDeleteThis is made clear when American actors like George Clooney have recently criticized media treatment of Meghan saying she is being “pursued and vilified”, and likening her scrutiny to that was received by Princess Diana. Like all PR for Meghan, this statement, too, seems to be doing more harm than good, with thousands of people leaving vitriolic comments.
Others have expressed the thought that “Princess Diana-style PR will backfire on Meghan Markle and it’s not worth the gamble”, as reported in The Sun. And why is that? This one is quite simple. Because she is not Princess Diana, and many people are quick to point out that she is quite the opposite.
According to Lorraine Kelly’s viewpoint, the well-known Scottish journalist and broadcaster wrote: “Meghan Markle has mishandled her relationship with her dad Thomas ever since she began dating Prince Harry and she seems intent on making it worse.”
“By all accounts the Duchess of Sussex has taken it upon herself to brief several of her “close friends” to blab to a U.S. gossip magazine about how hurtful she has found the whole saga, and that - contrary to what everyone thinks - she has been in touch with her father Thomas.”
And, according to Samantha Markle, this could not be further from the truth. And again, she has the proof.
The British public expect the Royal Family to be wholesome. Perhaps not virginal, but wholesome, and a divorcee from America who has perhaps told a little fib or two, or ten, is just not sitting well.
(continued)
ReplyDeleteAnd, the fact that the British public, again, are left paying the bill is a bridge too far for many of them as she as seen as the antithesis of what a Royal should be - loyal, demure, honest, caring, family oriented, frugal and modest.
Meghan is appearing, by her own fault, to be none of these. And to be honest, why would she want to be anything but herself? Why should she care what the people think about her? Well, again, it is simple. It is because she now represents a Royal Family, one which has outlasted most, and wants to live to see another day.
According to an article in Town and Country magazine, Meghan is worth $5 million compared to Prince Harry’s $40 million, a sum he has accumulated from funds left in trust to him by his mother, Princess Diana, an inheritance from the Queen Mother, and his former salary as a captain in the British Army.
Yet, the British public ARE paying for Meghan’s PR, and hopefully they will learn to love her, for Harry’s sake. Regardless of what opinions are about Harry’s girl, the bill for Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, is being paid for by the British tax payers, and hopefully they will get what they pay for. And, it’s certainly racking up in any currency.
Let them eat cake? You betcha!
So, that was the Forbes piece - or was the Forbes piece.
ReplyDeleteForbes isn't really a particularly well-respected magazine any more, but someone thought this article was bothersome enough to get it deleted. I wonder who.
Thanks again to the Lipstick Alley ladies for doing the original cut and paste.
Nutty, perhaps the author got pestered by the bot army?
DeleteWasn’t there one desenting writer who got 7,000 tweets at point for saying the wrong thing? (I can’t remember where I read it, probably in a blog post about the doxxing or something.)
(Hell, even regular people like me can have trolls assigned to me to trigger me, etc. if I’ve said the wrong thing about the wrong person. I can’t imagine the hell a writer for Forbes gets. Remember that article in The Cut about BFF Priyanka? Same thing.)
*dissenting
DeletePRO TIP: if any of you guys ever feel like a commenter/group of commenters are personality attacking you to drive you away from this site (an you happen to get email notifications for replies to threads you subscribe to), search that user’s name in your inbox and go through all the previous comments they’ve made that happened to be sent to your inbox from the email notifications. Usually, if it is personal (or a paid troll/something personal) you’ll see a pattern in their previous comments (the subjects they choose to comment on, their stance, etc). If you see no patterns, then it’s just a coincidence & a one-time thing. But sometimes you’ll see red flags based on previous comments.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI checked this Twitter out and apart from the fact that he owns his own PR agency, the profile doesn’t fit the content. (Born judging a book by its cover, but totally unexpected.)
DeleteAnyway, when I was about 23, I had a short story published in a women’s magazine under a nom de plume and my mother confronted me, “did you write this?!”
(I always thought because I was inexperienced at 23, that my personality ‘leaked’ into my writing so it was obvious/transparent to everyone.)
For a second I thought perhaps the writer provided the wrong twitter handle (like gave one with a typo or something and led to that one). Very weird.
*NOT judging a book by its cover
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteFinally found the byline - it was on the #wycwyg Instagram.
ReplyDeleteThe writer of the article was an elderly British gent named Roger Aitkin: "I am a freelance financial journalist based in London and former FT staff writer covering stock exchanges and transaction services. In recent years I have written for a number of trade titles like Futures & Options World (FOW), magazines such as the FT’s Investors Chronicle and UK national newspapers like The Independent."
None of his previous work is about celebrity or royalty. And he doesn't have a Twitter.
I'm still leaning towards a phone call from Sara Latham to someone at Forbes as the reason the story was suddenly removed after publication.
(FWIW I will delete my previous posts that suggested other people might have written the story.)
Ah. Thank you, Nutty.
DeleteIt’s still weird (I used to get a free corporate FT paywall account from a previous job as a media analyst LOL).
But most of all, that’s a little damning because an elderly English gentleman who used to write for the FT doesn’t fit the profile of a “jealous haterz” type.
AND the FT isn’t wannabe lefty, is it? Don’t they usually enjoy the establishment quite a bit?
People will slay you on Social Media for posting something they don’t like
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Delete
DeleteYeah, they will slay you. But the level of slayation varies.
Oddly enough, when I tweeted under the #MeToo hashtag about a casting notice from Marvel, I got kind of scary responses.
But I get ZERO hate when I tweet #MeToo hashtag about the British Council’s activities (how the use venues in Indonesia associated with sexual abuse/harassment because they don’t have to pay rent—unlike the Dutch embassy/French cultural centre that own their own venues in Jakarta—meanwhile they’d rather spend taxpayers’ money to clear London streets of homeless people for a royal wedding).
Not even on social media, if I say teh wrong thing about the wrong person here on CDAN, certain posters start posting things they know a will Ben triggering for me (I tracked their commenting history down, and they’vehad patterns of posting on related/relevant threads—it’s almost as if they’re assigned to “watch” people here). In 2017 it was the worst & they’d sockpuppet (agree with each other too). I thought they went away after I made it clear taht I had no intention to ever visit London (I used to get death threats about that) but now I think they’re back just with different names.
I can’t imagine being trolled by Meghan Markle’s team when she has that former Hillary person on board. 😱😭
Also Rachel/Meghan sucks, and if she had a brain in her silly head, she would know that you don’t mess with the future King or his Family
ReplyDeletePoor Kate and Wills, who have always done their utmost to love, support and be there for Harry
They must be heartbroken
WOW NUTTY - thanks for the paste!!
ReplyDeleteI'm sure you put it on your site too - thanks for contributing to the richness of CDAN, I like how your blog doesn't seem a competitive platform but more like another channel to watch. :)
@Nutty I left you a couple of comments on your blog but they never showed up. I'm not sure I did it right.
ReplyDeleteSomeone's hidden Twitter account doesn't like the Forbes article!
Hahahahaha! You ninnies!
ReplyDelete@Nutty_Flavor You really need a hobby.
@Scandi, I agree that it's odd for a financial reporter to be so interested in the Duchess of Sussex. But he did focus on how much money she was costing the UK taxpayer, so maybe that was his angle.
ReplyDelete@Ann, I'm sorry to hear you had trouble posting. I don't know why that would be. A poster named "Shy Anne" was having trouble a few weeks back as well.
@Hunter Thanks - I'm glad you enjoy the blog! It's just for fun. I only get around to it when I have time.
Interesting news this morning that Meghan has decided to give birth at a provincial hospital instead of the well-equipped, top-of-the-line Lindo Wing. Supposedly because it's "close to her home in Windsor" even though they haven't moved into Frogmore Cottage yet.
Sounds like they don't want the spotlight at the birth - and Meg always wants the spotlight.
This gives credence to the "surrogate" theories. No photos at the birth, just a fancy photo spread in a glossy magazine a couple of months later.
For newcomers to this thread (I see the DM top comments are sending people here!), you can access my Meghan blog by clicking on my profile.
ReplyDeleteHarry married a whore. What did he or the royals expect? Titles and money don't buy you brains. What a pathetic Royal House!
ReplyDeleteNutty-- thanks for pasting that article. Dont they realize by having articles like that (negative, but not salacious)removed, they are only strengthening many of the suspicions and negative views that are already out there, AND offering more eyebrow raising confirmation to those who are trying to remain indifferent? Thankfully, the public is a little more savvy to the PR and behind-the-scenes shenanigans today than in the past. Buying stories and bullying others gets noticed, and defeats the purchased intention.
ReplyDeleteMeGain got so much attention for her fancy pants vegan soy paint, now she can also promote vegan salad dressing!
ReplyDeleteOne last correction - Roger Aitken, the writer of the Forbes piece, does indeed have a Twitter account. It is https://twitter.com/AitkenRL.
ReplyDeleteA link to the Meg piece is still up on his Twitter account, which suggests that Aitkin was not the one who requested that it be pulled.
About 160 Twitter replies at the moment, roughly 2/3 thanking him for the piece and the others complaining it is "racist" "misgynoir" "lies" "xenophobia" "misinformation" and "hate".
If you took a shot every time you saw one of those words mentioned by Meghan fans, you'd have a serious drinking problem very quickly.
Pretty soon CDAN will have a special website just for MM vitriol.
ReplyDeleteWhat next Meghan is an alien so says anonymous person on the internet who has seen the flying saucer? Honestly never heard such bullshit.
ReplyDelete