Blind Items Revealed #4
June 27, 2019
The woman with the very tough title to pronounce is getting divorced. Apparently she is still seeing the royal.
Rose Hanbury, Marchioness of Cholmondeley/Prince William
The woman with the very tough title to pronounce is getting divorced. Apparently she is still seeing the royal.
Rose Hanbury, Marchioness of Cholmondeley/Prince William
Get that Royal Jizz, girl. If his wife was takin care of the dick instead of picking out clothes, he wouldnt need to cram it in you.
ReplyDeletePrince Willy looked like he had one of Rosie's tampons up his arse yesterday.
ReplyDeleteWaity Kaity looks like she's getting ready to make a run for it. Nice to see Diana's sisters. Both handsome ladies.
I think Sussex's should go hang in Africa for a while, I think everyone would be a lot happier. Including them.
Lol@Donna🤣🤣🤣
DeleteAfter seeing everything his mother went through with the media and with Charles and Horseface, he still can't resist fucking up his marriage to his beautiful (albeit boring as hell) wife with his own Horseface. Why do Windsor men cheat on their wives with fug women?
ReplyDeleteSpoiler alert: we just won.
ReplyDeleteI just googled Rose. Yikes, Cheesegrater, she really is a horseface. Yeesh. She either has magical lady parts or he's just diddling whatever requires the least amount of effort. I would think he could find someone way better to cheat with.
ReplyDelete@Sandy, I'm spending far too much time here because I don't follow sports and knew exactly what you are talking about. haha
ReplyDeleteWhere's Chelsea Davy when you need her?
ReplyDeleteUgly broads are more willing to go the extra mile to please. God bless low self esteem.
ReplyDelete+1 thia👏
ReplyDeleteI'm interested in knowing what you all think of the *VERY REAL* looking baby?
ReplyDeleteI know several have insisted there wasn't a baby...
Jeesh. I hope this isn't awkward for u
Kate ain't going no where, she got her claws in Wills 2nd year of Uni and hasn't let go, this ain't the first time he screwed around.
ReplyDeleteWills just looked like he was trying to keep a straight face, get over it.
Yes, the baby is real, stop believing stupid racist on the DM.
It's a replicant, Rosie.
ReplyDeleteWill why?!?!? Or is this just MeAgains leaks to make the Cambridge’s look worse than the Sussexes?
ReplyDeleteand speaking of complaining about MM's clothes, what the hell was Kate's horrendous outfit? That ugly, too small pink dress with a red braided headband instead of a hat (ugly) and red stilettos? She got dressed in the dark.
ReplyDeleteRegardless, I still don't believe this blind. And stupid Wills looked like a slapped arse yesterday.
Hope this isn't true. But if it is .. What is with Wills and his father going for ugs? This woman Wills is supposedly rallying with is horrid.
ReplyDeleteOf course there was always a baby.
ReplyDeleteHe looks like them both.
I liked Kate's dress. The hat was a little strange, and the shoes didn't seem to match the dress. Maybe it didn't photograph well.
ReplyDeleteMeghan looks good in white or ivory. She wears it a lot lately. Is she making that her signature look?
The pic of the family at the Christening? Something is up. Charles and Camilla have on the exact same clothes (and jewelry) that they wore for Louis's christening. There is no reflection in front of the mirror. Kate and William have different clothes on than what they walked in with. If they were going to photo-shop the whole thing why didn't they photo-shop the Queen in?
ReplyDeleteAhhhh there it is.
Deletelol
lol@rosie
DeleteKate wore white to the babies' christenings too. I guess white looks good with that christening gown. Plus it draws your eye in.
ReplyDeleteCamilla's dress is different from Louis's christening, as is Charles's tie.
ReplyDeleteIs there anything you nutcases can't start a conspiracy theory over?
Oh I forgot it’s the wife’s fault when a husband cheats ⚠️
ReplyDeleteIf ya take the lead out of a pencil, it aint gonna write.
DeleteSo, either Kate is the best actress in the world. Or this is another BS blind.
ReplyDeleteYeah, she's definitely ugly, with a strange overbite.
ReplyDeleteLots of men continue to have sex with their wives and still cheat. Crazy, I know. Cheating husbands are entirely the fault of the cheating husband.
ReplyDeleteI think with some group photos they have been photographing people separately and putting them together later for a while now. Don't the Kardashians do that too, for their Christmas cards? It doesn't necessarily mean much. It can be tricky to get a good group photo, especially with kids in it.
ReplyDeleteI didn't notice that anyone else wore white at the christening. Diana was in blue with Harry's christening. They reran some of those photos with Archie's.
It's a good look for Meghan.
What if the Prince is a platonic pal helping Lady Chumley through her divorce from a dirtbag?
ReplyDeleteAgreed Krab. Have no time for the responsibility being deflected onto someone else.
ReplyDeleteThe photos were photoshopped and probably done awhile ago unless MM managed to lose 20 lbs. in 2 days. She’s pictured at Wimbledon and is much heavier, especially her face (unless that was photoshopped as well.) She also had a very orangey looking tan at W, and in the Christening photos does not. The baby in the group photo is not the same as the baby in the b/w photo. Totally different head shapes. Baby on MM’s lap is much older than 2 months; probably closer to 4. Christening gown is not the same one that the Cambridge kids wore. It’s a knock off. You can tell by the lace down the front, the length, and the hem.
ReplyDeleteI think Kate looked great, but yes, that is not the outfit that she arrived in. And supposedly they were only there for one hour. So change clothes, ceremony, and photo op in one hour? Doubtful.
@Meredith: RE: Kate’s recent style: Most of the more Bohemian looks I’ve seen her wear were at her ‘garden’, which makes sense to me. She was dressing for the occasion & tying into the theme.
ReplyDelete@Donna: Agree that they should go to Africa for awhile. Never seen such a tone-deaf couple. The dress that she wore @ the Christening cost $12,000. This on the heals of the public complaining about the cost of renovating Frogmore, where they don’t even seem to reside.
ReplyDeleteha ha. What a laugh. I read somewhere that not only is William still seeing Rose but CATHERINE IS STILL SEEING HER AS WELL! Someone from the small town where Rose lives reported seeing the three of them in a car together. and, the reason that this rumour was started was that someone online was asking people about the goings on around the homes of the two families, presumably to gather some dirt.
ReplyDelete>The baby in the group photo is not the same as the baby in the b/w photo. Totally different head shapes. Baby on MM’s lap is much older than 2 months; probably closer to 4. Christening gown is not the same one that the Cambridge kids wore. It’s a knock off. You can tell by the lace down the front, the length, and the hem.
ReplyDeletehahahahahaha you are hilarious.
The christening gown is not the original antique one and hasn't been since...I think Prince Harry's christening? They've used a copy or 'knockoff' since then, so in that sense, it is.
ReplyDeleteWas there film of the christening? Or did they just release stills? No press, right?
Here's what I think because I'm a psycho and follow this like Nutty_Flavor - closely!
ReplyDeleteLook at the group shot - why does (proportionately) Kate look ... larger than Prince Harry??? Wait - and William too? She looks like Jolly Pink Kate and I want to see Giant Kate memes with a superimposed ginormous Kate in a bunch of royal images.
They were not wearing those clothes when Prince William & Kate arrived on the grounds. They were there less than an hour. So. They... changed? K
Baby - cross-eyed - JUST LIKE BABY MEGSY - there is now speculation it could be her own baby pic photos (face) for compilation images.
MANY women have argued babies cannot hold up their head until 3-4 mos and the child is "two" months old - child is holding its head up.
Meghan not only doesn't (maternally, naturally) support her baby's head, she is gazing at Harry, NOT the baby, in the promo shot. Big mistake.
Also Harry's head is photoshopped with way more hair in these pics, it's funny - I did that for an ex's profile photo once.
WHAT ELSE - there might be a baby now? They may have secured one? The palace has adopted using the © symbol when re-posting any Harkle images. This means once the palace has jettisoned Meghan (in theory) they can dis-avow themselves from the whole mess by saying "that's theirs, see the ©?? Not ours."
Also people are saying her fedora is some sort of yachting availability flag. Um.
Can anyone tell me what woman gains weight (in her face/ass/thighs) AFTER giving birth but at zero point before??
As for Wills's choice of Miss Chumley, who else could he trust to appreciate the importance of genuine discretion? Perhaps Kate is a far better actress than we give her credit for.
ReplyDeleteHere is a Q though -
ReplyDeleteIF you were going to create a fake pic - is that really the one you will include of Prince William?
Because that is some epic troll level face he is serving.
Some have suggested Lord Geidt actually made this and is letting her hang herself. It is so hard to know what to think.
Why would there not be a baby? What would be the point? For the photo call for its first day of kindergarten are they going to put a lifesize doll on wheels?
ReplyDeleteAbout the weight. This sounds crazy. BUT since half of the comments are grasping at logic and pulling the shorter straws...(joking)
What if a surrogate carried this baby but toward the due date, Meghan unexpectedly turned up preggers the natural way? Completely unexpectedly?
So that now her puffy face and thicker middle are because she really is pregnant?
I did think she looked much slimmer in the christening photo. If it was taken a while ago and the baby photoshopped in...
ReplyDeleteBeing actually pregnant now could explain a lot of things. The extended due date, the sudden weight gain after "giving birth," the reclusiveness, and all the other things people have named.
Imagine you plan your first child through a surrogate and then wind up expectant near its due date? But you can't tell the world you used a surrogate?
It's just a wild thought as long as we are all (some) talking about dolls and hat signals.
(Why does CAPTCHA hate me?)
Samantha, along with many chortles - Flashy Vic has taught me one needn't press on the Captchas.
ReplyDeleteHmm. I'll have to figure out how to finesse that, GB.
ReplyDeleteChecked your profile to see if it was maybe newer members who still needed captcha. Once you're here a while it won't necessary. Keep checking.
ReplyDelete@Samantha: The Christening gown is a knock-off of the new one. As I stated in my post, it is NOT the same one that the Cambridge children wore.
ReplyDelete@Hunter: There is a very disturbing clip (can’t remember where I saw it) of MM at Wimbledon with Lindsay Roth and her other friend. At one point, Lindsay is pinching MM’s arm, as though she’s trying to control her. Then one of them tells her to ‘put her hat on’ and she does. Quite odd. Even odder is that one of Diana’s sisters is wearing a Panama hat in the Christening photo—WTF?
ReplyDeleteMost of us agree that there always was a baby. We vehemently disagree, however, that MM was ever pregnant.
ReplyDeleteI understood the post Aquagirl - I was trying to disagree with it while remaining polite. I don't know what difference it makes what the kid wore.
ReplyDelete"Christening gown is not the same one that the Cambridge kids wore. It’s a knock off. You can tell by the lace down the front, the length, and the hem."
ReplyDeleteI haven't done a side by side, minute comparison of the lace in the christening gowns. I see no reason to as it doesn't matter.
I just gotta know why she's gained weight AFTER birth. That's NOT how it works!!!
ReplyDeleteI just can't even
ReplyDeleteLol
I read in a french rag that she was only 3 weeks at Eugeneies wedding when they announced. Very shortly after she miscarried and there was a mad dash of ivf and fake bumps to get her preg again. She gave birth a couple weeks early days before the "turn around" pic. Could explain her near tears, how she looked preg at the first Archie pic and how she is way heavier now than before. But why not just tell the world they miscarried, would have humanized her. Some people just cant admit when things dont go as planed I guess.
ReplyDeleteI do wonder where this story of William allegedly sleeping around started. It isn't like he's going to do any better than Catherine.
ReplyDeleteThe christening gown is indeed the same one the Cambridges wore.
ReplyDeleteAs for the idea that a two month old can't hold up its head: HAHAHAHAHA have you idiots ever been around an actual human baby before?
Newsflash: of course a two month old can hold up its head. Furthermore, babies in the early weeks change their looks day by day. If those of you who are questioning this child had ever had a child of your own, you'd know that.
Get your crazy ass conspiracy theory heads out of your asses.
A couple in their thirties had a baby. AMAZING
Not quite, the William having an affair BS is another of SMegma Markle’s disinfo scams to not only hurt Kate, but to discredit William and advance the prospects of the ginger whinger Harry.
ReplyDeleteMarkle has run out of PR funds, so Enty is re-running this dribble.
ReplyDeleteSeems like the various points of view have been well covered above, so I won't jump in.
ReplyDeleteI do think it's fun to see people we never see contribute on any other post suddenly turn up as eager, repeat posters when it comes time to promote Meghan Markle.
Totally organic, I'm sure.
Excellent point, Nutty.
DeleteLove your blog, by the way! Spot on and written well.
I don't think it's a physical affair with Lady Chumley but if Wills thinks Megs is behind the rumors I can see why he'd glower at her photo op.
ReplyDeleteI think it's PH and Megs' baby. I don't think it's a doll or a stunt baby. I don't know what the point would be there.
I agree that if they had any issues around fertility or anything, it would only endear them to the public to be open about it. They want to be modern and do things differently. Start there.
@Samantha: so you laugh at tin hat theories and then create one, lol
ReplyDeleteI didn't laugh at anybody's comment wiez. I think you have me confused w/someone else.
ReplyDeleteI had someone insisting that the lace gown was new like it mattered...I tried side stepping but they wouldn't let me.
BTW what is "tin hat" about fertility issues? That's a thing.
ReplyDeleteNothing wrong or shameful in it or in using a surrogate.
Nice alt btw...never saw you on here before and suddenly you are @ing me directly. k
ReplyDeleteCatherine has smashing gams! And much like Eugenie upstaged Meghan's wedding dress and tiara, Catherine's legs steal the whole christening pic show. Also, Megs totally copied Catherine's christening look. Imitation being the highest form of flattery.
ReplyDeleteThe baby at the post-birth photo call had the same skin color as Meghan, but is now whiter than white. One would think that being out of the body would allow for melatonin to take effect, but apparently the baby has undergone a rigorous skin-bleaching regimen since being born.
ReplyDelete