Here are more photos of Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson in Sandringham on Christmas Day. They were both allowed to walk with the royal family to and from the church on Christmas morning. This was the first time Sarah had been included on the Christmas walk in 32 years. She said afterwards that she felt “grateful” to be included. The British papers are full of stories about Fergie’s triumphant comeback after 30-plus years. There are lots of mentions of Prince Harry, because there’s a concerted effort to force the comparison between the Yorks and the Sussexes.

She was part of the Sandringham festivities last year but was kept out of sight. Her elevation to the church-going group was a clear statement that she was back in the fold of the extended family. She is not going to suddenly start taking on royal duties, but her presence in front of the cameras on Christmas Day was something that would have been unthinkable a few years ago, when Prince Philip was alive. He was regarded as her most implacable opponent within the family. A touch ironic then that last year she, Andrew and their daughters had the use of Wood Farm, the home on the estate where Philip spent time after he retired from public life.

“We are enjoying each other’s company and feeling grateful today,” she wrote on Instagram on Christmas Day, beneath an old picture of her with her daughters. “I hope everyone has a wonderful day. Happy Christmas to anyone who celebrates and season’s greetings to all.”

The King, whose broken relationship with his younger son, Harry, and daughter-in-law Meghan, has been further eroded by their insistence on telling their “truth” in unsparing detail, may simply have decided that he has little time for prolonging old feuds.

Andrew is a profound embarrassment to the family, but central to his unusual relationship with his ex-wife is that she is unwaveringly loyal to him. They still live under the same roof and are seemingly devoted to each other. Her most scandalous days occurred before some involved in this year’s Sandringham Christmas were born, or had married into the family. Perhaps the King, with so many other pressing concerns, thought it absurd that the mother of two of his nieces should not be there.

There has been speculation that the Queen has had a role in the warming towards the duchess. After all, Camilla knows a thing or two about rehabilitating a public image.

Compassion almost certainly also played a part in the decision to give Fergie the call-up. Earlier this year, after a routine mammogram, she was diagnosed with breast cancer and underwent a mastectomy and reconstructive surgery. Afterwards she told a podcast that she had named her “perky” new breast. “I’m just coming to terms with my new best friend Derek, on my left,” she said. “He’s very important because he saved my life.”

The Yorks will be bracing themselves for a fresh development in the Epstein affair in the new year, after a judge in the US ruled that documents in a civil case naming Epstein’s associates will be unsealed.

Any attempt by Andrew to rehabilitate his reputation is likely to be a very long game indeed. But he seems likely to have his ex-wife with him in the enterprise. Could her appearance on Christmas Day indicate the beginnings of a royal strategy, desperate though it might be? She was once persona non grata, but it is not inconceivable that some in the Firm see this mother, grandmother and ex-wife as an antidote to relieve some of the toxicity around the Duke of York.

And perhaps there is a signal too to members of the family in California that reconciliations can be achieved, even if they sometimes take three decades.

[From The Times]

“And perhaps there is a signal too to members of the family in California that reconciliations can be achieved, even if they sometimes take three decades.” The Sussexes left and, despite the British media’s fantasies to the contrary, they are not begging and pleading to come back. Harry does want some form of reconciliation, but it will have to come on his terms. As for Fergie… yeah, I don’t know what’s going on there. It probably was about the Epstein “client list.”

Also: the Ephraim Hardcastle column in the Daily Mail reports that QEII gave her permission for Fergie to be buried at the Royal Windsor estate. QEII “sanctioned a St George’s Chapel Windsor funeral for Fergie followed by internment at the Royal Family burial ground at Frogmore.” This was done because Fergie is the mother of “princesses of the blood royal.” Still, Fergie will not be anywhere near the royal crypt where QEII and Prince Philip are interred.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

What are the most rewatchable movies of 2023? Barbie is definitely up there, I just rewatched it this week! [Pajiba]
Bryan Tanaka confirms his split from Mariah Carey. [Seriously OMG]
Review of George Clooney’s The Boys on the Boat. [LaineyGossip]
Margot Robbie’s style before her Chanel contract. [Go Fug Yourself]
Wham’s “Last Christmas” finally reached #1 on the UK charts. [OMG Blog]
The history of kissing under the mistletoe. [Jezebel]
Rest in peace, Lee Sun-kyun. [Just Jared]
Who was the best-dressed man of 2023? [RCFA]
People don’t talk about Danny Kaye’s rizz enough these days. [Tom & Lorenzo]
Patrick Schwarzenegger is engaged. [Hollywood Life]
Great home products. [Buzzfeed]

If you’re a regular Jeopardy watcher, you’ve noticed by now that this fall’s season has been one tournament flowing into the next without any episodes featuring new contestants. This was the show’s workaround to the WGA strike: tournaments somehow allowed them to use previously written but unaired categories. For those of you growing weary of the endless tournaments, I regret to inform you that they’re likely to continue until April 2024. Again, the delay is due to the writers being on strike from May to October. Writers matter! Mayim Bialik walked away from hosting duties to strike in solidarity with the writers, leaving co-host and former champion Ken Jennings to man all episodes himself. As discussed here last week, Bialik and the show just officially confirmed her permanent departure. Jeopardy executive producers claimed “continuity for viewers” was behind their decision to stick with Jennings as the sole host, but new reporting from Matthew Belloni at Puck News suggests that Bialik’s actions during the strike may have been the driving force:

Bialik striking in solidarity upset Sony executives: “Bialik’s actions during the strike were at least a contributing factor, according to three sources close to the show.” Mayim hadn’t been on-screen since last May, walking out of all things Jeopardy! when the WGA went on strike, later citing solidarity for her union. The report continued: “Sony TV executive Suzanne Prete and [Jeopardy!] executive producer Michael Davies were furious when Bialik said in May that she would step away from the final week of filming last season in solidarity with the show’s striking writers. “After all, Jeopardy! and Wheel of Fortune are well-oiled machines, requiring precise timing to make the show’s five-episodes-a-day schedule.”

But Sony had other reasons, too: First, Bialik’s reception on set was less than favorable, and second, Sony had adjusted shooting schedules last season to accommodate her since-canceled Fox sitcom Call Me Cat. “Bialik wasn’t loved on set,” Puck News claimed, but did not specify further. “And Sony had switched up shooting that [previous] season to accommodate her sitcom.”

Egads! These hosting salaries: According to Puck News, the Big Bang Theory alum was pulling in an annual salary of $4 million. Bialik’s compensation was allegedly set to increase by $1 million each year that she remained with the franchise. Puck News also noted that Ken is also making $4 million a year, although that number is expected to increase now. The late Alex Trebek reportedly made $10M a year as host.

[From The Sun]

Meanwhile, Jennings was giving some interviews to hype new episodes of Celebrity Jeopardy, and The Hollywood Reporter squeezed in a question to him about Bialik’s firing. His answer was very diplomatic, if somewhat milquetoast:

“It took me off guard, because I loved working with my Mayim and I’m gonna miss her. I can’t speak to her decision-making process or her opinions about it.

But on my end, I’m just a fan of Jeopardy! and I’m always delighted to host when they call upon me. I just feel extremely lucky to have even been considered for this job as a non-broadcaster.

It’s kind of a weird thing to try to bring back an ex-contestant to host, and I’ve obviously been learning as I go. But I loved growing up with Jeopardy! where Alex was the host of that show for almost 38 years, and people just kind of felt like he was part of their family, and it’s impossible to fill those shoes. But it’s such an honor and hopefully I look forward to 37 more years of doing it, when I’ll be a very, very old man.”

[From The Hollywood Reporter]

So Jennings says a sentence or two about Bialik, but then deftly pivots to broad comments on hosting in general. The show’s PR team must love him! Honestly, I feel like no one comes out of this story looking good. Jennings mainly dodges the question, the least offensive action here. But then again Sony stuck with him in the first place because he worked through the strikes. Bialik did the noble thing by showing solidarity with the writers, but I’m not surprised, either, that Sony was fed up with continually having to reschedule her filming dates. Still, I think Sony earns the most stink of all because the main headline is that they fired Bialik for standing by striking workers. And all these people are being paid millions of dollars a year.

Here’s the kicker for me: the current tournament airing right now is “Second Chance,” wherein previous contestants who didn’t win get… a second chance. Something Sony producers declined to extend to Bialik. I’ll take Potentially Hypocritical Actions for $400, please!

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Jeopardy! (@jeopardy)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Jeopardy! (@jeopardy)

Photos credit: Avalon.red, Cover Images and via Instagram/Jeopardy

Over the holidays, I finally watched several of the big Oscar-bait films of 2023. I watched Killers of the Flower Moon, Oppenheimer, Anatomy of a Fall, Asteroid City, The Holdovers and I started (but did not finish) Saltburn. I think these films represent some of the biggest performances of the year and some of the most likely Oscar nominees – like, some of the Best Actor nomination locks are: Cillian Murphy (Oppenheimer), Paul Giamatti (The Holdovers) and Leo DiCaprio (Killers). There are many arguing that Bradley Cooper is a lock for a nomination for Maestro, but given the sh-tty reviews and everyone rolling their eyes at B-Coop’s try-hardness, I wouldn’t even call Maestro a lock for ANY nominations. The other possible best-actor nominees will likely include Andrew Scott (All of Us Strangers), Barry Keoghan (Saltburn, but doubtful), Jeffrey Wright (American Fiction) or Colman Domingo (Rustin).

This whole time, I’ve sort of considered Cillian Murphy the one to beat in the Best Actor race. The film hinged on his performance, he was genuinely brilliant in it, he’s been around forever and done great work consistently, and Oppenheimer was one of the biggest films of the year. Like, of course the Oscar is Cillian’s to lose, right? Well, the New York Times’ critic and awards-season specialist Kyle Buchanan had a different thought:

I think Best Actor is Giamatti’s for the taking https://t.co/cTySTN45ok

— Kyle Buchanan (@kylebuchanan) December 25, 2023

After seeing The Holdovers… I’m not sure I agree, but it’s an interesting thought. Giamatti is wonderful in the film, The Holdovers is one of Alexander Payne’s best, and Giamatti is a truly beloved American actor, churning out great performances consistently in film and television. If Oscar voters think that they’re giving Giamatti an Oscar for his career, I could see him challenging Cillian’s chances. What’s even funnier about this Murphy vs. Giamatti head-to-head is that I’m not sure either man cares that much. My thought was “well, it will come down to who wages the better Oscar campaign,” but let’s be real – Cillian will have to be dragged kicking and screaming to those Oscar-voter screenings and the man isn’t a glad-hander or an ass-kisser. Giamatti might be more into it – he already seems to be doing the Oscar-voter screenings and glad-handing, just in a quiet way. Anyway, it’s interesting. The Best Actor race might be super-competitive this year.

Oh, and Giamatti was on the SAG-AFTRA picket line too. That will matter to a lot of pro-union Oscar voters.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images, ‘The Holdovers’ posters courtesy of Focus Features.

People have been fighting about Prince Edward and Sophie’s titles for years. Even when QEII was still alive, Prince Charles made it clear that he had no desire to “give” them the Edinburgh ducal titles they were promised by QEII and Prince Philip. There was also a big discussion about whether Sophie and Edward’s two children should have prince/princess titles, as Louise and James would have been entitled to as grandchildren of the monarch. At the end of the day, Charles “gave” Sophie and Edward the Edinburgh titles (for Edward’s birthday this year) and that was supposed to be the end of that. Sophie was finally a duchess and Charles belatedly fulfilled his mother’s wishes. Now the Edinburghs apparently want more? Richard Eden wrote this nonsense in his pre-Christmas newsletter with the Mail:

Edward and Sophie are the unsung heroes of the Royal Family – but it is an insult that their titles as Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh are not hereditary. That’s the view of Richard Eden, who believes King Charles should give them an immediate upgrade so they can pass the dukedom down the generations – a move which might also encourage their son James to join ‘The Firm’ when the time is right.

‘It is sometimes easy to forget that the Royal Family is much more than just our monarch. And I would like to highlight two of my unsung royal heroes of the year: Prince Edward and Sophie,’ writes Eden in the latest edition of his Palace Confidential newsletter.

‘With the Duke and Duchess of Sussex having quit royal duties, or “forced” to quit, as Prince Harry preposterously claimed in the High Court, and Prince Andrew no longer a “working royal”, Edward and Sophie have become even more vital to “The Firm”. They have worked as hard as ever this year, carrying out engagements around the country and overseas with little fanfare.’

‘While Harry and Meghan have used their royal titles for personal gain, helping them make a fortune in the United States of America, Edward and Sophie have continued the tradition of quiet public service embodied by Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip. They have deliberately chosen often difficult, unfashionable causes to highlight, such as in Sophie’s case, helping women who have been victims of sexual violence. Edward will meet hundreds, if not thousands, of young people who have achieved Gold in the Duke of Edinburgh’s Award scheme, of which he is patron.’

‘King Charles recognised the couple’s contribution to the success of the Monarchy by announcing on Edward’s 59th birthday in March that he would succeed their father as Duke of Edinburgh. This was something that our late Queen and Prince Philip had publicly made clear should happen at the time of Edward’s wedding to Sophie Rhys-Jones in 1999. It was, however, a shame that the King turned the Dukedom of Edinburgh into a life peerage rather than the hereditary title it had previously been. In my opinion, this was an insult.’

‘What better way to celebrate Edward and Sophie’s importance than by upgrading the title to a hereditary one? Perhaps that would be a good way to encourage their son, James, the Earl of Wessex, to join The Firm when the time comes? He could join his sister, Lady Louise Windsor, in providing vital support to their cousin Prince William.’

[From The Daily Mail]

Is this Sophie’s new thing? I always felt like she was the one behind the push for the Edinburgh titles, and now the non-hereditary titles are not even good enough for her. It could be that this isn’t even Sophie calling up Eden – it’s quite likely that this is Eden realizing how boring the left-behind Windsors are and how the whole thing is about to fall apart in a hurry unless younger royals (like James and Louise) are allowed to “support” King Charles and eventually King William. The thing is, Charles and William don’t want the support. Sophie has buttered up William and Kate, for sure, but neither Charles nor William want a “Prince James” or “Princess Louise” hanging around. Which is also the reason why Charles and William forced the Sussexes out, btw.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

Every year, I forget about the annual early-January keenery for the Princess of Wales’s birthday. When Kate turned 40 in 2022, we got wall-to-wall sugar for a solid month, just story after story about how Kate is the most perfect, most humble, most special person to ever marry into the royal family. Well, we are heading into Kate’s 42nd birthday keenery and I wonder how big the palace will go for this one. Judging from People Magazine’s cover story this week, it feels like this birthday will be used for some image-maintenance around Kate being (accidentally) named as one of the royal racists. Some highlights:

Kate ignored all of the royal-racist stories in November & December: “It is why a lot of people who have worked with her think she is such an asset to the royal family, because she has this amazing professionalism,” royal author Valentine Low tells PEOPLE in this week’s issue.

Kate is tough, despite appearances: Like other royal consorts in history, Kate has a toughness behind the scenes as she supports her husband and future king William. “She has this public image of being nice and smiley and, dare I say, innocuous,” royal author Valentine Low tells PEOPLE in this week’s issue. “But she is actually strong-minded, strong-willed and prepared to fight for what she wants and what she thinks is right.”

Kate’s insistence on “recollections may vary” in the palace’s statement: “She thought it was very important this did not go unchallenged,” Low says. “Kate thinks strategically. She is going to be queen one day and has the longterm interests of the monarchy and royal family at heart.” Adds royal biographer Sally Bedell Smith, “She showed real strength and determination to make things clear that there was perhaps a different truth.”

No reconciliation: After several years of family strain, claims and allegations from Harry and Meghan are in the rearview mirror for William and Kate—and there is no sign of reconciliation between the two couples. “She’s moved on and William has too,” a friend of Kate’s tells PEOPLE. “She’s very focused on what matters going forward, They aren’t looking back.”

Influential & keen: As her 42nd birthday approaches on Jan. 9, Kate can assess her first full calendar year as the Princess of Wales. And while she may not be monarch, she has replaced Queen Elizabeth, who died at age 96 in 2022, as the best-known female member of the royal family—and one who wields an increasing amount of influence. “She’s very much seen as a player at the center of team Windsor,” says Simon Lewis, former Buckingham Palace and co-host of the BBC podcast When It Hits the Fan.

She keeps calm & carries on: “She has close friends and family around her and a good relationship with her father-in-law [King Charles],” says an insider, “that equip her going forward.”

[From People]

Here’s the thing, I actually believe that Kate is “stronger” than she might seem. While I’ve made my feelings clear on Kate for years, increasingly I have a lot of hate-respect for her ability to navigate this ridiculous system and come out “ahead.” She’s a survivor too, and she’s had to do terrible things to survive. Of course, it helps that she’s married to the heir and that the palace didn’t launch a full hate campaign against her like they did with Meghan. She’s been protected, coddled and infantilized for decades, which she’s used to her advantage up to a point. The problem with all of this is that Kate’s goal was seemingly to survive short-term and not thrive or plan for the future. She’s been incredibly complacent. Instead of being “a player at the center of Team Windsor,” within the family, she’s been politically neutered, shuffled off to Adelaide Cottage and largely ignored.

Also: “she has replaced Queen Elizabeth, who died at age 96 in 2022, as the best-known female member of the royal family.” There’s currently a whole-ass queen consort but I guess People Mag doesn’t want to think about Camilla.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, cover courtesy of People.

I was surprised to see that Prince William and Kate barely worked in December, a month which has historically been one of their busier months. They seem completely over it, and by “it” I mean the whole “working royal” thing. They didn’t go to the pre-Christmas lunch at Windsor Castle, they didn’t go on any foreign tours together in 2023 and they barely fulfill the bare minimum of a part-time work schedule. The most notable thing is Kate’s apparent refusal to travel for work, alongside William’s lack of interest in traveling with his wife. Kate didn’t go to Singapore for Earthshot and she only left the UK once for “work” – attending a royal wedding in Jordan. Well, that’s going to change in 2024 – the Foreign Office is sending Bill and Cathy to Italy in “early 2024.”

The Prince and Princess of Wales are to make their first official trip to Italy, but are unlikely to meet the Pope, The Telegraph understands. They are set to undertake a short tour of Italy in early 2024, planning to see the sights of Rome.

They will be travelling on behalf of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, representing the UK with a programme designed to further the relationship between the two countries.

The trip will be the first time they have been hosted by Italy in their capacity as senior members of the Royal family, and their first joint official visit since Elizabeth II died. It is likely to include meetings and state events.

The trip has not yet been confirmed and is in the early planning stages, but it is understood a visit to the Vatican, which would ordinarily be arranged long in advance to take account of the Pope’s carefully managed schedule, is not likely.

A spokesman for Kensington Palace said: “We look forward to announcing the Prince and Princess’ travel plans in due course.”

It will mark a return to official joint tours for the couple, who have not represented the UK together overseas since a challenging trip to the Caribbean in March 2022.

[From The Telegraph]

Once again, notice they’re not being sent to a British realm or commonwealth country. They’re going to Italy, not really a hotbed of monarchist sentiment nor a significant British ally. It basically sounds like Will and Kate fancied an Italian vacation. The thing about possibly visiting the Vatican is interesting too – the Telegraph is shutting down that speculation, but Becky English at the Mail claimed that “negotiations around the couple meeting with Pope Francis are still ‘very much on the table’ and ‘nothing has been decided yet’.” Basically, the palace put in a request for Peg & Buttons to go on a Vatican adventure and Pope Francis isn’t sold on the idea. Becky English also calls this upcoming trip part of a “European charm offensive.” The last time they invoked the “charm offensive” title, we got the Boston Flop Tour and the Caribbean Flop Tour.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

Nicholas Witchell was the BBC’s royal correspondent for 25 years, and he retired this week, on Christmas Day. Ahead of his retirement, he sat down with Roya Nikkhah at the Times of London to talk about the Windsors, the role of royal reporting and of course the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. Witchell went viral in 2019, on the day Prince Archie was born, because Witchell, doing a live BBC link-up, lost his train of thought completely and stammered around, trying to avoid saying “the first mixed race child in the royal family.” Witchell’s interview got a lot of headlines this week but really, he’s just saying what most royal reporters have said a million times. Some highlights from this interview:

They can’t ignore the Sussex saga: “You cannot ignore Harry and Meghan and that story, however tedious at times it may become. We’ve fully reported the split, the biography and all the other machinations of it. There have been soap opera aspects to the royal family for a long time and an appetite for the tittle-tattle, scandal end of reporting. It’s not an aspect I feel at home with, but I recognise it is part of the job.”

His viral moment in 2019, when Archie was born: “That was my worst single moment in 48 years. Drying up in front of the audience live on the telly. It was about Harry and Meghan and maybe subconsciously I just wasn’t that interested… I’ve obviously asked myself what went wrong. I was tired, you need to wind yourself up to stand there and do that, and I hadn’t. I was complacent, you cannot be complacent about live television because if you are, as I demonstrated in front of however many million people, it can bite you.” The public were mostly kind and he received letters of support from actors who had dried up on stage. “I’ve never been able to watch it and it shook my confidence quite a bit.”

His thoughts on the Sussexit: “I think probably it was always going to happen because he was looking for a way out and he perceived her [Meghan] as being the route out from a life that, as we now discover, he had never felt entirely comfortable with — a life to which psychologically I think he was not suited. Should the Palace have tried harder? Yes. In different hands, might it have handled things differently? Yes. I think by that stage the Queen was the age she was and would have found it difficult to understand the anguish Harry was going through.”

He dismisses the Sussexes’ narrative that the Palace machine was against them from the start. He praises their team of unstuffy courtiers — Samantha Cohen, a punchy Australian who served as their private secretary, and the equally punchy Americans Jason Knauf and Sara Latham, who both worked as their communications secretaries. “That team bent over backwards to accommodate them and to be in sympathy with her [Meghan]. Not one of them was the archetypal Buckingham Palace courtier and if anyone was going to carry it off, that team would have done so. Meghan is clearly a very intelligent, articulate, ambitious woman, and you would have thought she would have appreciated the fact that these people were working so hard to make it work.”

Meghan & the culture clash: “It was hugely complex, but I think there was a clash of cultures. I really don’t think race was a significant factor in it, I think it was more nationality and culture than it was race. But I must recognise that I’m an elderly white male — of course that colours my outlook on the world — and it clearly is not how she or they saw things. It’s a huge loss to the royal family, when you think what they might have done had they been prepared to try harder and give it more time. If she had perhaps just been less impatient, less inclined to see well-meaning people as being in some way against her. It’s sad, particularly the relationship [breakdown] between Harry and William.”

He has sympathy for Harry after reading Spare: “I hadn’t fully appreciated the degree to which he was struggling with his mental health until I read Spare.”

But he hates Harry’s battles against the press: “I think they’re misjudged, misguided, a touch paranoid — there is nothing to be gained from them. There is no doubt at all that he, like other members of the royal family, has been badly treated by the media on occasions. But I think they’ve [Harry and Meghan] been overly sensitive. They are public figures, they make use of the media. So they should be more prepared to take the knocks with the positive moments. But that’s not their way. I think their focus has become so narrow and is so suffused with this sense of paranoia that they are failing to recognise the bigger picture, the opportunities that they have. They’re obsessed, he is certainly obsessed, with the way the media portrays him. Unhealthily so.”

His thoughts on William & Kate: “He’s fulfilling a difficult role with considerable skill, panache and commitment — as is his wife. They are capturing public sentiment in a very positive way, I think their image is a good one, they both care very much to do it correctly and to do positive things, to find areas of relevance.” Referring to their work on homelessness, the environment and mental health, he says: “Their commitment to the various causes that they’ve taken to their hearts strikes a chord with the British people. Not everyone, not in all parts of the United Kingdom, but I think they are doing a difficult job as well as anyone could.”

[From The Times]

This is always so hilarious to me: “I think it was more nationality and culture than it was race.” We don’t hate her because she’s Black, we hate her because she’s American! They think that’s a winning argument, that they were on Meghan’s throat from the jump because she’s an American but of course it was never about race, nevermind all of the racist dog-whistles and dehumanization, lies and racist scorn. “If she had perhaps just been less impatient, less inclined to see well-meaning people as being in some way against her.” Kate lied and told everyone that Meghan made her cry. KP staffers were calling her ME-gain and Degree Wife. William’s press secretary sold out the Sussexes in exchange for burying the Rose Hanbury story. But Meghan was just so impatient! She saw the worst in people! His comments about Harry’s press lawsuits are interesting, in that they indicate (once again) that the British media acts as a cartel, and that includes the BBC.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

Since QEII passed away, King Charles has included his disgraced, degenerate brother back into the royal fold. Considering QEII always wanted Prince Andrew included too, it’s less “Andrew is back” and more like “Andrew never left, and now his inclusion is even bigger and bolder.” Andrew was included in last year’s Christmas festivities at Sandringham, and he even stayed at Wood Farm (Prince Philip’s favorite place). Andrew was included at the coronation and at Easter in Windsor as well. Andrew is unquestionably “back.” But guess who else is back? His ex-wife Sarah Ferguson. Fergie was included in the Sandringham church walk on Christmas Day, and she even greeted well-wishers and collected flowers too.

Sarah, Duchess of York has been publicly welcomed back into the heart of the royal family as they celebrate Christmas at Sandringham. Prince Andrew’s ex-wife was seen with her daughters and former in-laws walking to the church of St Mary Magdalene for their traditional morning service.

She had been banned for decades from joining the family for Christmas after she was pictured with her financial adviser John Bryan in what became known as the “toe-sucking” scandal in 1992. Sarah and Andrew had already announced their separation and went on to divorce in 1996.

After the service Sarah and Andrew, both in jolly mood, joined King Charles, Queen Camilla and Prince and Princess of Wales in meeting the public in a walkabout. Sarah collected flowers and spoke with many wellwishers. Andrew was seen laughing and throwing up his hands as he joked with the crowds.

Her public return to the fold is a reward for her unswerving loyalty to the royals in contrast with the King’s younger son, who betrayed excruciating family secrets in his memoir Spare.

The gesture by Charles to accept Sarah will be deeply appreciated by Andrew. The Duke of York was welcomed back to walk with the Royal Family to the Sandringham church last year, following the Queen’s death and in spite of the removal of his HRH title in the wake of his friendship with the child sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein.

[From The Times]

Yeah, Fergie is problematic and she was friendly with Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell too, but I’m still more disgusted with Andrew’s inclusion. Andrew was credibly accused of rape and human trafficking – his ex-wife “only” took money from a human trafficking pedophile. Imagine thinking that Andrew and Fergie’s inclusion at royal Christmas is more palatable than “apologizing to Prince Harry.”

I’m also including photos of Prince Edward, Duchess Sophie and Zara Tindall – Edward has shown repeatedly that he’s fine with Andrew as well. Meanwhile, I think Camilla has been especially supportive of Fergie. All of the Epstein associations aside, I’m sure Fergie was included this year because she went through a real ordeal with her breast cancer diagnosis and treatment. There was a lot of public and private sympathy for her, to the point where following Fergie’s diagnosis, King Charles completely dropped the Royal Lodge eviction threats.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

The Wales family was out in full force on Christmas Day in Sandringham. The family must have decamped to Norfolk last week, as they skipped the pre-Christmas lunch at Windsor Castle on the 20th. By most accounts, the Middletons (or just Carole and Michael Middleton) joined the Wales family at Anmer Hall, although the Middletons were not included in the Christmas Day church walk.

The Princess of Wales chose a pretty good blue ensemble – a bright blue McQueen coat, with navy boots and what looks like a navy turtleneck dress (or separates) underneath. She accessorized with her sapphire-and-diamond suite, which once belonged to Diana. Prince William, Prince George and Prince Louis were also in shades of blue and navy, while Charlotte was allowed to stand out in an olive green coat. Also along for the ride: Mia Tindall, who seemed attached to her second-cousins Louis and George, plus Mia was helping Kate out with all of the flowers she got from well-wishers. Little Mia looks like part of the Wales family, and it was super-cute that they “let” her walk with her second-cousins. They’re also making a big deal about how Louis was allowed to wear long pants rather than shorts. Eh.

Meanwhile, King Charles and Camilla both wore sad beige. Charles’s coat is super-old and one of his favorites – he always wears that old thing. I feel like Camilla should have worn something a lot brighter and more Christmas-y. A hunter green coat would have worked well here.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.