Robert Kennedy Jr.’s anti-vaccine advocacy has already killed 83 people in Samoa, but he’s going to kill so many Americans as Donald Trump’s Secretary of Health and Human Services. Between his anti-vaccine views, his love of raw milk and raw meat, and the fact that a brain worm ate part of his brain, Kennedy will be one of the most dangerous men in America. And that’s saying something. While Kennedy has not been confirmed for HHS, he’s already making moves to… revoke approval of the polio vaccine.

President-elect Donald Trump has praised the polio vaccine as the “greatest thing,” but a lawyer affiliated with Trump’s pick to lead the country’s top health agency has petitioned the US Food and Drug Administration to revoke approval of the vaccine used in the United States.

The lawyer, Aaron Siri, filed the petition in 2022 on behalf of the Informed Consent Action Network, or ICAN, a nonprofit that challenges the safety of vaccines and vaccine mandates. Siri has been working closely with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. – a vaccine skeptic and Trump’s pick to lead the US Department of Health and Human Services – to choose officials to serve in the incoming administration. He was also Kennedy’s personal lawyer during his own presidential campaign.

“The FDA is continuing to review the petition,” an agency spokesperson said in an email to CNN on Friday. “We cannot predict when the reviews will be completed. The FDA will consider the concerns outlined in the petition as a final decision is made. The FDA will respond directly to the petitioner, and that response will be posted on the docket. Until such time, we cannot comment further.”

If Kennedy is confirmed as head of HHS, he’ll oversee the FDA and could take the rare step of intervening in its petition review process. In a recent interview, Kennedy told NBC News that he wasn’t going to take away anybody’s vaccines but said, “People ought to have a choice, and that choice ought to be informed by the best information.”

[From CNN]

So, that’s where we are at this point. An anti-vaxxer at HHS who is so f–king stupid, he wants to revoke approval for the polio vaccine. Honestly, if they go straight for polio, it would surprise me. I figured they would go straight for the MMR (measles, mumps & rubella) vaccine, which is what American kids get before entering school. I also think one of the first vaccine items on their agenda will probably be the HPV vaccine, don’t you think? But going straight for polio is wild.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Instagram.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex executive produced the Netflix docuseries Polo, which began streaming last week. Netflix did not spend any time or money on promotion for Polo. Neither did Harry and Meghan’s production company Archewell. Harry and Meghan also gave zero interviews or public statements in support of Polo, almost like they were making a point of not promoting it at all. Compare that with Meghan offering statements to the New York Times and InStyle on behalf of her investments in Cesta Collective and Highbrow Hippie, their silence and lack of promotion continues to make zero sense to me, but I understand I’m alone here. Obviously, I’m not playing 3D chess like Harry and Meghan, who are being targeted yet again in another exhaustive Mail exclusive. Nature abhors a vacuum, and the Mail’s Alison Boshoff wrote an exclusive which could easily become the sole narrative about the Sussexes’ business with Netflix. Some highlights:

The critical response to Polo was awful: Little wonder that the streaming giant now appears to be distancing itself from the show. Indeed, there has been no serious attempt by Netflix to promote the series – something surely almost unheard of for a five-episode programme. The company invested in no poster campaigns for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s latest project and its sole promotional attempt consists of a two-line statement from Harry on the streamer’s website.

The Sussexes were heavily involved with the making of ‘Polo’: Executive produced by both Harry, 40, and Meghan, 43 – they also make a brief appearance onscreen in the documentary – the series reflects the prince’s enthusiasm for this elite sport. And, indeed, behind the scenes, both he and Meghan were very hands-on when it came to the filming and editing of the show. The pair, I am told, spent many, many hours poring over footage, offering advice on what should make the cut.

The Waleses are projecting a more marketable image: It would seem that another reinvention for Harry and Meghan has not had the desired impact. What a contrast to William and Kate who, despite their most challenging year yet, have been projecting an entirely more marketable image. Indeed, the Princess of Wales was this week nominated for the prestigious Time Magazine person of the year title, while William has received many plaudits for his well-judged handling of President-elect Donald Trump when both recently attended the re-opening of Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris.

Christmas plans: William also spoke warmly this week of spending Christmas Day with 45 members of his family. Unsurprisingly, the question of whether Harry and Meghan will be welcome among the royal throng pulling crackers at Sandringham is something of a moot one. While nobody is commenting officially – on either side of the Atlantic – the answer to that question is clearly ‘No’. A royal source says: ‘The unspoken understanding is that an invitation is not on the cards.’

Meghan’s 2025 launches: Next year, then, looks to be an uncertain year for the Sussexes, particularly for Meghan, who faces her greatest solo challenge of all – the launch of her Netflix cookery show and of her much-discussed lifestyle brand, American Riviera Orchard. Indeed, after the apparent failure of Polo, so much hangs on her cookery show that some are calling it the ‘last chance’ for her to ‘save’ the couple’s lucrative Netflix deal – which is, after all, their chief source of funding.

Make or break: One Californian source tells me: ‘It’s make or break. People say Netflix are exhausted. It’s so much work with her and, bluntly, the “deliverable” does not seem to be worth it.’ Another entertainment executive remarks: ‘Her show will have to be an enormous hit to turn around their deal and their reputations in this town.’ Well-placed sources indicate the launch of the show and the brand will happen in the first quarter of the year and, judging by the fact that it’s not part of any Netflix schedules in January, we must expect late February – after Harry’s Invictus Games in Whistler, Canada – or even March for the launch.

Secrecy around Meghan’s cooking show: A Netflix source says details of Meghan’s project are being shared with only a ‘tiny’ audience of executives in the US. ‘It’s a very tight circle,’ I am told. ‘Everything to do with her is kept completely secret.’

Netflix’s Ted Sarandos wants Meghan to be their version of Joanna Gaines: So striking are the parallels between [Meghan and Joanna Gaines] that some believe Sarandos is betting big that Meghan will strike a chord with ordinary viewers like down-to-earth Gaines has. They say the duchess will be his version of Gaines – although Meghan’s sophisticated vibe is far distant from Gaines’s down-home Texan charm. Sarandos said of Meghan in September: ‘I’ve been out with a lot of famous people before – the way that people react to Meghan is otherworldly.’

Where ‘Meet Me at the Lake’ stands: Netflix have bought the rights to the chick-lit book Meet Me At The Lake for the Sussexes – an unusual move, as you would expect the producers to find the cash. But whatever stage the scripting is at, it has yet to enter production. The same is true for the couple’s TV series retelling the story of Charles Dickens’s Great Expectations through a feminist lens with Miss Havisham as the heroine. Again, it has yet to enter production. Neither show, then, looks likely to be completed or broadcast before the Netflix deal is up for renewal.

[From The Daily Mail]

It’s increasingly bizarre to me that the launch of Meghan’s show and ARO product line keep getting pushed back. She filmed the show back in April and May, and it feels like nothing is ready even now. I know Meghan likes to deliver completed projects, but… yeah, it will be interesting to see when all of this stuff comes out. If Sarandos is making a point to groom Meghan into a duchess-y version of Joanna Gaines, I would hope that the financing and promotion is there to back it up. It’s also bizarre that they were “given” Meet Me at the Lake as a property to develop and… absolutely nothing has happened with it. No casting, no director selected, nothing about a workable adapted script.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Cover Images.

Here are some photos of King Charles on Friday, attending one of his favorite events – the Crafts at Christmas showcase at Highgrove Gardens. That’s where local craftspeople and artisans showcase their work – I think for sale? – at Charles’s Highgrove estate. He loves that kind of thing and he was delighted. Unfortunately, this was one of the few delights left in the Christmas season. Charles had his Christmas agenda set: Project Snub The Sussexes 2024. Charles and Camilla invited their extended families to Sandringham for Christmas and palace insiders could not shut up about how Charles would host “the largest Christmas gathering in years.” Of course, Charles was making a point to tell everyone that Harry, Meghan, Archie and Lilibet are not invited. And then Prince Andrew blew up the plan with his Chinese spy drama, which broke last week. Andrew had been providing access to a Chinese spy for several years… and now it’s ruined Charles’s Christmas agenda.

The royal family is unusual in many respects, and punishing people by not allowing them to go to church is one of their oddities.Such a sorry fate potentially awaits Prince Andrew, with speculation rife that King Charles may distance himself from his brother on Christmas Day amid controversy that Andrew allegedly befriended a Chinese spy. A report in the London Times said the king “could” ban the duke from joining the royals on their annual walk to church in Sandringham.

Andrew was previously banned from attending the Christmas Day service (and photocall) after his disastrous BBC interview in which he failed to express any regret for his association with Jeffrey Epstein. He was readmitted to royal churchgoing society in 2022, but it now looks like the rehabilitation is over.

Supporting the thesis of the Times story, The Daily Beast was told by a friend of the king, “His Majesty’s patience is wearing thin. He has stood by Andrew for many years, but everyone has their limits. I can’t see the king wanting to walk to church with someone who was friends with a Chinese spy.”

Buckingham Palace declined to comment but another friend of the king said: “Andrew is finished. You would have thought it would be hard to find a way to make things worse but somehow he has managed it.”

[From The Daily Beast]

Notice how they’re talking around whether Andrew is still invited to Christmas at Sandringham and they’re making it all about the church walk on Christmas morning. That’s because Charles is too chickensh-t to actually disinvite or outright ban Andrew from Sandringham. It’s gotten so bad, Charles’s minions ran to Becky English at the Mail to rant about it. The basic gist is that Charles is exerting public pressure on Andrew to not come to Sandringham:

As the nation prepares to sit down and break bread with their nearest and, ahem, sometimes not so dearest this season of Goodwill, the King is facing a particularly vexing Christmas conundrum. What on earth to do about his bothersome brother, Prince Andrew, whose issues seem to pop up like a particularly bad bout of the annual festive flu. For the truth is that the King doesn’t want to have to go so far as to ban Prince Andrew from joining the rest of the Royal Family for the much-loved Sandringham church visit and walkabout. He is, at the end of the day, his blood brother: he can’t divorce him, or indeed prevent him from seeing other family members.

But he is desperately hoping the Duke of York will ‘do the decent thing’ and ‘recuse’ himself from joining them at Sandringham to spare the rest of the Royal Family further embarrassment following his latest, and potentially highly politically damaging, scandal, having a suspected Chinese spy as a ‘close confidant’ and trusted business adviser. As it stands, I am told, Andrew is due to join the rest of the family in Norfolk next week for the festive gathering. He and his ever-expanding family – including his ex-wife, the Duchess of York, and daughters Princess Beatrice and Eugenie and their children – had been expected to take over Wood Farm, a large property on the royal estate.

Now, engulfed in yet another furore of his own making, pressure is being placed on the duke to ‘see sense’. Friends suggest Andrew, 64, must know his presence will put His Majesty in a very awkward position. If he allows him to attend it will be tantamount to putting his arm around his brother’s shoulder in a very visible manner just days after he became embroiled in an explosive ‘spy’ scandal. But to ‘ban’ him would be the equivalent to a public excommunication – and with all the apron strings finally cut, who knows what the duke might do next?

Andrew, I understand, will still have the chance – should he so wishes – to see his family at the private pre-Christmas lunch the King throws his extended family (the cousins, nieces and nephews who don’t make the cut to Norfolk) this week – but a discreet entrance and exit, at least, would be appreciated. But after that? Well, sources say, surely it is a matter for that much-vaunted sense of ‘honour’ Andrew told us all he had during his infamous 2019 interview in the wake of Epstein scandal and to politely withdraw from all royal festivities, for this year at least. His family would certainly be grateful for it, I suspect, and he might even earn some respect.

[From The Daily Mail]

Becky English devoted the second half of the piece to ranting about Royal Lodge and how Andrew could still live in Frogmore Cottage free of charge if only he would give up his home. The whole “But to ‘ban’ him would be the equivalent to a public excommunication …who knows what the duke might do next?” thing is about Harry. They’re emphasizing that Harry has been excommunicated, that Harry is unwelcome, that Charles doesn’t worry about his other blood relation, his younger son. Even before the spy business blew up, it already looked awful that Charles was making such a BFD about “big family gathering for Christmas” while pointedly excluding his son, daughter-in-law and grandchildren. That’s also why I think Andrew will be welcome at Sandringham, but yeah, he probably won’t go on the church walk.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

I’m giving this a name now: these articles are part of “The Mail Remembers” series. The Mail Remembers various years-old stories about the Duchess of Sussex, and re-reports those stories with zero new information. The purpose is, I believe, to examine where everything went wrong for them, postmortem-style. “Remember when the Middletons were really tacky about Meghan in 2017? Could we have handled it differently?” And “Remember when Meghan told off Harry’s bigoted friends? Should we have reported it differently?” Perhaps I’m giving the Mail too much credit for self-reflection. It’s more likely that they’re recycling all of these old stories because they’re just sad that they bet big on a bunch of losers. Anyway, the latest in “The Mail Remembers” series is: remember how Harry felt a real urgency to marry Meghan quickly, without a ten-year waitying courtship?

When a royal couple gets engaged before they really get to know each other, it often has disastrous results. The Royal Family learned that lesson after Prince Charles proposed to 20-year-old Diana after only dating for around six months, meeting in person just a reported 13 times over that period. So after Prince Harry started dating Meghan Markle in July 2016, and rumours of an engagement started to swirl by 2017, his family were quick to step in.

It’s claimed Prince William, who dated Kate for eight years before proposing, was ‘nervous’ about how quickly the couple were moving, as he was worried Meghan would struggle to transition into the life of a royal in such a short period of time. But Harry brushed off his brother’s concerns, claiming that he had to marry her quickly because her ‘biological clock was ticking’ as she was almost 35 years old, according to royal author Tina Brown.

However, the author claimed William’s unsaid biggest worry was for his younger brother’s ‘mental fragility’ and that he wouldn’t be able to cope with all the ‘scorching scrutiny and harassment’ that Meghan would come to endure.

Shortly after Harry, now 40, and Meghan, now 43, started dating, the couple met the Queen at an informal drop by at Royal Lodge in Windsor after church. According to Ms Brown, who was a confidante of Princess Diana’s and met with her just weeks before her death, the Queen reserved judgment and was ‘just happy Harry was happy’. However the author wrote in her bestselling book, The Palace Papers: Inside the House of Windsor: ‘But William knew Harry all too well and feared he was heading for trouble. Every time his brother fell in love, it was an eruption of Vesuvius. “You do realise this is the fourth girl you’ve taken to Botswana”, he couldn’t help but remark after Harry’s starry-eyed account of the trip.’

For her book, Ms Brown spoke to 120 royal insiders over the course of two years, and claims most of the family – including Prince Charles and the Queen – appeared to like Meghan, but it was Prince William who had the biggest reservations. William also had concerns Meghan would not have enough time to create a life for herself in the UK and make new friends. She would also have to give up her entire life in North America, including her acting career. At that time, Meghan knew almost nobody in London and had little understanding of British culture.

But perhaps more importantly she was not prepared for the ‘scorching scrutiny and harassment’ that comes with being a member of the Royal Family, claims Ms Brown who previously edited Tatler and The New Yorker. She quotes sources from Palace veterans who knew the coming storm would be nothing remotely like the kind of benign exposure a TV actress had to endure. But according to the book, Harry’s response to William’s fears was that the most effective way to protect Meghan would be to marry her ‘as quickly as possible’ so that she would receive the same police protection that he did while he was still a working royal. Harry was also claimed to have said since she was a month away from turning 35, her biological clock was ticking.

[From The Daily Mail]

All of these “The Mail Remembers” stories have made me laugh, but this one has some special sauce to it. They’re seriously banging their heads against the wall and wailing “where did it all go wrong?!?”… and Harry and Meghan are still happily married and completely in love. “They married too quickly!” No, they didn’t, but even if they did, they’re happy? The “where did it all go wrong” problem is that the moment Harry figured out that Meghan was and is The One, that was the beginning of the unfolding catastrophe of the House of Windsor. Harry and Meghan are fine, and the Windsors and the British media can’t handle that.

As for the actual trip down memory lane… I think Harry didn’t want to make Meghan wait around indefinitely for years for multiple reasons: he was constantly worried that she would “come to her senses” and leave him if he didn’t lock it down quickly; he was crazy in love and they both wanted to start a family ASAP; Meghan probably needed to be engaged/married to stay in the UK; when you know you know and they both knew they had found the One; and Harry was very concerned about Meghan’s security and he saw an engagement and marriage as the easiest way to protect her and keep her safe.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

A week ago, Jay-Z was sued by a woman who claimed that Jay and Sean Combs raped her in 2000, after the MTV VMAs. Jay spent all of last week furiously issuing statements and having his lawyers file a blizzard of legal actions, all with the intention of convincing the court to dismiss the case or pressuring the woman and her lawyer (Tony Buzbee) to drop the case. On Friday, NBC News aired their interview with the accuser (who is still protecting her identity), and after she told her story to NBC and they fact-checked her, she admitted that her story is full of inconsistencies. From NBC News’ exclusive (I’ve edited some of this for space):

An Alabama woman who accused Jay-Z and Diddy of raping her when she was 13 years old sat down with NBC News to recount what she called a “catastrophic event”: a limo ride to a white house, a drink that made her feel woozy, a sexual assault by rap stars that would ruin her life. But the woman and her lawyers also acknowledge that there were some inconsistencies in her account in response to questions from NBC News.

“I have made some mistakes” in recollections of that night, the woman, identified as Jane Doe in the lawsuit filed against Jay-Z and Diddy, told NBC News. The woman said she stands by her allegations overall. The inconsistencies in her account of the incident — alleged to have happened 24 years ago — do not necessarily mean the allegations are false.

Among the inconsistencies: The woman said her father picked her up after the alleged sexual assault, but he says he doesn’t recall that. The woman also claims she spoke to a celebrity at the after-party where she said she was sexually assaulted, but that celebrity said he was not in New York at that time. And images from that evening show Jay-Z, whose real name is Shawn Carter, and Sean “Diddy” Combs at a different location than the one the woman described, although their whereabouts for the entire evening are unclear.

“This incident didn’t happen,” Carter told NBC News in a statement Friday, “and yet he filed it in court and doubled down in the press,” he added, referring to one of the woman’s attorneys, Tony Buzbee. “True Justice is coming. We fight FROM victory, not FOR victory. This was over before it began. This 1-800 lawyer doesn’t realize it yet, but, soon.”

NBC News traveled to Houston to interview the woman, who declined to be identified, at her attorney’s office earlier this week. “You should always fight for what happened to you,” she said about why she is going public with her accusations now. “You should always advocate for yourself and be a voice for yourself. You should never let what somebody else did ruin or run your life. I just hope I can give others the strength to come forward like I came forward.”

The woman, who is now 38, told NBC News she was living in Rochester, New York, in 2000 and that attending the VMAs was “on my bucket list at 13. It was like, ‘Oh, my gosh,’ one of those things I’ve got to do.” She said she snuck out a window to evade her parents. A friend drove her to Radio City Music Hall in New York City, she said in the lawsuit. People thronged into viewing areas outside the venue, which was decked out for the awards. Crowds roared when J.Lo arrived. Eminem performed on the street. She didn’t have a ticket, and said in the suit she watched some of the show on a jumbotron outside. She also started chatting up limo drivers. “I’m trying to get in to try to stay back and get to an after-party and get invited in and meet some celebrities,” she told NBC News.

One limo driver said he worked for Combs and that she “fit what Diddy was looking for,” the suit said, and he told her to return later and he’d take her to an after-party. After about 20 minutes in the limo, she said in the suit, she arrived at a “large white residence with a gated U-shaped driveway.” She said in the suit she signed a document that she didn’t read.

Inside, she told NBC News, “I’m talking to, like, Fred Durst, Benji Madden, about his tattoo, because, you know, about his tattoo that’s ‘The Last Supper,’ because I have a religious background, so it was just something to talk about.” After accepting a drink from a waitress, she told NBC News: “I started feeling funny. Tried to start looking for a place to lay down.”

She found an empty room with a bed in it, she said in the suit, and soon after, Combs, Carter and a woman entered the room. “You are ready to party!” Combs said, according to the suit. Both Combs and Carter raped her, she said. “Jay-Z comes over, holds me down. I start trying to push away. He puts his hand over my mouth, tells me to stop it, to cut the shit, and then he rapes me like he had me overpowered,” she said. Afterward, she said in the suit, she managed to flee the house and ran to a gas station.

“I was upset, and the person at the gas station could tell that I was obviously upset, and she let me use the phone. I called my dad because he was the only person I trust at that time. I told him I messed up and I needed a ride home,” she told NBC News. “We rode home in silence. He didn’t ask me what happened. He didn’t ask me what I did or where I was.”

There are some inconsistencies in her story about that night. Her father told NBC News that he does not recall picking her up after the alleged attack, casting doubt on a key detail in her lawsuit. According to their address at the time, her father would have driven more than five hours from their home to pick her up. “I feel like I would remember that, and I don’t,” he said in an interview Thursday. “I have a lot going on, but I mean, that’s something that would definitely stick in my mind.” The woman’s father, who said he learned of the alleged assault this week, added that he did remember once picking her up in the middle of the night. But, he said, it “was a local drive.”

Asked about her father’s account in a follow-up interview on Friday, the woman said she stood by her claim that he had picked her up and that it’s possible he had misremembered. “There are a lot of things, and this is stuff that we argue about constantly, something he said or did back in New York around that time period he just doesn’t remember,” she said. “It actually causes a lot of fights sometimes in the household.”

The woman also told NBC News she spoke with musician Benji Madden at the after-party. But a representative for Madden confirmed that neither Benji nor his brother Joel attended the 2000 VMAs and that they were on tour in the Midwest at that time. (The woman did not accuse the brothers of any wrongdoing.) “Honestly, what is the clearest is what happened to me and [the] route that I took to what happened to me. Not all of the faces there are as clear,” the woman said in the Friday follow-up interview. “So I have made some mistakes. I may have made a mistake in identifying.”

Also among the woman’s allegations that could not be corroborated is how she made it to New York City that night. One of her attorneys provided NBC News with the name and birth date of the friend she said drove her, who would have been 20 at the time. That person appears to have since died. NBC News’ attempts to reach the person’s relatives were unsuccessful.

[From NBC News]

I think the most damning inconsistencies are: she was a 13-year-old driven from Rochester to NYC by a 20-year-old who cannot be found; she called her father in Rochester who drove five-plus hours to New York to pick her up and another five hours to drive her back home and they didn’t speak about it at all, AND he has no memory of it? The Madden brothers not even being in New York that month is also a pretty huge inconsistency. I’m including a video from a lawyer who has worked on SA cases and she breaks it down really well.

This lawyer works with sexual assault cases and basically, Tony Buzzbee fucked up, majorly. Jay is going to take his law firm, watch. pic.twitter.com/kJ5qo3fbf6

— Brisket Back Bish (@AshleyShyMiller) December 14, 2024

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Avalon Red.

Last week, we learned that a Chinese spy had been banned from entering the UK after MI5 discovered an array of incriminating material on the guy’s phone. What made the situation into international news is the fact that the accused spy was a close associate of Prince Andrew, the Duke of York. They were so close, Andrew and his people authorized the alleged spy to act on Andrew’s behalf in business dealings in China. They were so close, the alleged spy was apparently advising Andrew and his staff on ways to get around palace security. What’s especially crazy about this situation is that the bulk of the incriminating stories about Andrew’s relationship with the spy happened after Andrew’s Newsnight interview in 2019, meaning: it happened after Andrew “stepped down” as a working royal. Chinese intelligence kept pursuing Andrew and apparently used him as some kind of asset/useful idiot. As such, the alleged spy got invitations to Buckingham Palace, St. James’s Palace, Windsor Castle and Royal Lodge. LOL.

An alleged Chinese spy who has been banned from Britain on national security grounds entered Buckingham Palace, St James’s Palace and Windsor Castle at the invitation of Prince Andrew. The Chinese businessman, 50, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was invited into Buckingham Palace twice. He also attended a function at St James’s Palace and an event at Windsor Castle. On another occasion, the alleged spy was invited as a guest to the Duke of York’s birthday party at Royal Lodge, Andrew’s 30-bedroom home on the Windsor estate.

The Chinese businessman, who was previously not known to be a security risk, was barred from entering the UK when he was stopped at the border under counterterrorism laws in 2021. Details of his connection to the royal family emerged in a hearing on Thursday, in which he tried and failed to get the ban overturned. The alleged spy is also believed to have met George Osborne, the former chancellor.

A statement from the duke’s office last night asserted that Andrew had “ceased all contact” with the businessman. The announcement read: “The Duke of York followed advice from His Majesty’s Government and ceased all contact with the individual after concerns were raised. The duke met the individual through official channels, with nothing of a sensitive nature ever discussed. He is unable to comment further on matters relating to national security.”

A palace source confirmed that the King had been briefed “through the appropriate channels” about his brother’s links to the alleged spy. The fact that Andrew was so close to someone who is facing accusations of espionage has raised questions about what sort of intelligence might have been sought from the duke.

[From The Times]

“…Has raised questions about what sort of intelligence might have been sought from the duke.” That can be read in so many ways, it’s kind of a brilliant British burn. While Andrew knows a lot of royal secrets and he has plenty of compromising personal secrets, it’s not like Andrew knows the launch codes (hopefully). It’s not like he can sell anything but access to himself, his family and maybe a handful of politicians. And it sounds like that’s exactly what he did, sell access, and he got this alleged spy into some of the most elite spaces in the kingdom. How much did China give Andrew for all of this access? That’s the question, isn’t it.

Chinese money given to the Duke of York is being investigated by the security services, The Telegraph can disclose. Prince Andrew’s business venture is understood to have received money from Chinese donors with links to an alleged Communist party spy. The case raises serious questions for the Duke over how he funds a lavish lifestyle that includes the upkeep on Royal Lodge, his 30-room home at Windsor, and his own private security.

The Telegraph can disclose that Buckingham Palace has no way of scrutinising the Duke’s finances, including the money used for the upkeep of Royal Lodge, which is owned by the Crown Estate. Sources said the palace had “no power, authority or legal right” to do so and that all palace officials could do was seek assurances that the Duke’s money was “legitimately earned”.

It can also be revealed that the King was made aware of the MI5 investigation into his brother and his links to the alleged Chinese agent before the bombshell judgment which exposed their friendship.

[From The Telegraph]

I genuinely wonder if Andrew will be allowed on the Christmas church-walk this year. It definitely feels like… I don’t know, maybe Charles is giving Andrew some payback after all of the bullsh-t with Royal Lodge? It’s not that simple, I know, but Buckingham Palace certainly isn’t lifting a finger to help him, even if BP is compromised by the association too. As I said, it’s wild that so much of this happened post-Newsnight interview, but it’s further evidence that Andrew didn’t really stop scheming back then. He was still working various angles, he was still selling access, he was still being enabled by his mother.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Cover Images.

Samuel L. Jackson is currently promoting The Piano Lesson, which streams on Netflix. It’s another adaptation of an August Wilson play, and John David Washington directed it and co-wrote the adapted screenplay. Sam is currently 75 years old (man, he’s ageing well) and as always, he works so consistently. Sam and Nicole Kidman work like they’re paying off gambling debts. But I digress! While Sam received an honorary Oscar in 2021, he’s only received one Oscar nomination for an actual acting role – Pulp Fiction, back in the 1990s. Well, Sam is here to tell everyone that, actually, it’s not an honor just to be nominated.

Samuel L Jackson said in a video interview with AP Entertainment, while promoting his role in Netflix’s “The Piano Lesson,” that Oscar nominations aren’t too big of a deal for him. Shockingly, Jackson has only earned one Oscar nomination during his illustrious career — for “Pulp Fiction,” which he landed a best supporting actor nod for in 1995. Jackson was awarded an honorary Academy Award in 2021.

“We’ve been in the business long enough to know that when folks go, ‘It’s just an honor to be nominated.’ No it ain’t. It’s an honor to win,” Jackson said with a laugh. “You get nominated and folks go, ‘Yeah I remember that.’ Or most people forget. Generally it’s a contest you didn’t volunteer to be in. I didn’t go in there so I could flex. ‘Let me do my scene, so you can remember who I was.’”

“They nominate you and people go, ‘What is that movie you’re nominated for? What’s the name of that thing?’ And after it’s over and people have a hard time remembering who even won,” Jackson added.

[From Variety]

First of all, maybe I’m an old fart now (#facts) but back in the day, Oscar nominations really did mean a lot more, and so did the Oscars. Back in the day, people did know and remember who won and who was nominated. But these days – and it’s been this way for years now – I do think all of it has just declined in significance and importance overall. People genuinely don’t remember who was nominated for what, and they barely remember the winners. Like, Gary Oldman won a Best Actor Oscar for wearing a fatsuit and prosthetics to play an extremely drunk Winston Churchill. Rami Malek won for those teeth. I totally forgot that Eddie Redmayne won for The Theory of Everything! Anthony Hopkins won and they didn’t even let him speak because they thought it would go to Chadwick Boseman! The past ten years have been messy as hell.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.

What will it take to get Amy Adams out of her flop era? [Pajiba]
This is a good explanation of The Brutalist. [LaineyGossip]
Nicholas Hoult walked the carpet for the first time with Bryana Holly, his partner of seven years. They have two kids together! [Just Jared]
Artist Stewart Taylor is back. [Socialite Life]
Dallas Cowboy cheerleader Armani Latimer dances without her wig to promote alopecia awareness. Don’t let Chris Rock know. [OMG Blog]
Cynthia Erivo wore Moschino. [RCFA]
Even when she was a kid, Leah Remini had that wry smile. [Seriously OMG]
I still have no idea what Welcome to Plathville is actually about. [Starcasm]
James Kennedy charged with domestic violence. [Hollywood Life]
This Nicole Kidman Wig Quiz made me lol. [Buzzfeed]

I like the Duke and Duchess of Sussex a lot, but even more than that, I root for them. I want them to be successful, I want them to be rich, safe and protected from the high-level campaign to hurt them and disrupt every part of their lives. Which is why I want them to make better decisions about how they communicate with the world and how they promote their work. This is turning into their Achilles, their bizarre and outdated communications strategies and their refusal to advocate on their own behalf when it comes to their business. They massively f–ked up last year when they went silent as Spotify dropped them and Bill Simmons called them “f–king grifters.” And they’re f–king up again this month by refusing to promote the Netflix Polo series. Meghan and Harry wouldn’t even do a couple of interviews in the trade papers, they wouldn’t even host a screening. So, obviously, the narrative of “Polo is a bomb, and the Sussexes don’t even want to acknowledge it” narrative has taken hold.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle seem to be galloping away from any association with their new show about polo, after it was ridiculed by critics as a tin-eared foray into the “world’s stupidest sport.”

Notably, there has been no visible promotion for the show, entitled, imaginatively enough, Polo; no interviews or podcast episodes with Meghan or Harry have dropped, and records suggest there are no premieres or press events scheduled to support its launch earlier this week. It’s a grim turn of events for the couple, once heralded as Netflix’s golden duo. Their own lack of engagement with promotional efforts for the show, which they executive produced and have a cameo role in, suggests even they know it’s a dud.

Sean McNulty, a producer, writer, and Hollywood veteran who also created and wrote the Hollywood newsletter The Wakeup, told The Daily Beast: “This one hasn’t been on my radar at all this week, which maybe says it all right there.” McNulty noted the absence of coverage in the Hollywood trade papers and the apparent absence of any scheduled premiere or press activity for the series, saying: “The lack of a proper, visible press campaign for a series from Harry & Meghan raises an eyebrow to say the least.”

He said that Netflix has launched “other much higher profile content this week” such as Carry-On, Jamie Foxx and Sabrina Carpenter specials, which suggested Polo “could very well disappear in to the Netflix ether quite quickly.”

Harry and Meghan do not have official social media accounts but their friends who have often promoted things on their behalf have been eerily quiet too. Even Nacho Figueras, the player sometimes described as the David Beckham of polo, who is one of the stars of the show, only posted a few tweets and one Instagram story about the show earlier this week before moving on.

More shuffling away from the bad smell was evident in remarks attributed to a source reportedly quoted in Closer Magazine, who said the end result was “pretty much out of their control” because “the bosses wanted the series to appeal to the masses and push this reality TV angle.”

With a spokesperson for the couple declining to comment, it looks suspiciously like Harry and Meghan would rather we all quietly pretend this new show doesn’t exist. Critics, however, do not appear ready to extend that courtesy.

Even Harry’s arch-foe Prince William appeared to troll the couple earlier this week, revealing he has been enjoying Netflix—except he said he was watching the hit new show Black Doves.

[From The Daily Beast]

As I said, I watched one episode of Polo and I’m going to finish the series this weekend. It’s enjoyable and actually well-done. Harry and Meghan should be proud of the finished product, and I cannot understand why they’re refusing to hype it or even remind people that it’s out now. Sussex fans will say “the British media gives them free promotion for whatever they do,” but that’s how the “Polo is a terrible show and it’s bombing” narrative came about in the first place. Even if H&M aren’t particularly proud of Polo – which, again, I think is a good show – they still have the responsibility as producers to hype their product and ask people to watch it.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Netflix.

In September, a judge ruled on the Heritage Foundation’s 20-month attempt to gain access to Prince Harry’s visa records. Originally, Heritage FOIA-requested Harry’s visa records, which of course are not public documents. Heritage then took that FOIA request through several federal courts. They wanted access to Harry’s records because Harry wrote about his drug use in Spare, and Heritage was on a fishing expedition to discover IF Harry lied about drugs on his visa application. The idea being, if Harry lied about drugs, he could be “deported back to the UK.” Heritage was openly doing the bidding of the British media AND the monarchy. Anyway, back in September, the judge examined Harry’s records and then ruled in favor of the Biden administration’s Department of Homeland Security, denying Heritage access to Harry’s file and putting the whole thing under seal. Meaning, the judge saw nothing alarming in the file and saw no reason for Heritage to have access to someone’s private immigration documents. We hoped it was all over.

Then Donald Trump “won” the election. Suddenly, there’s been a revival of interest in the “Prince Harry could be deported” storyline. The British papers are salivating at the thought of it. Royal reporters even suggested that Prince William might have spoken to Donald Trump about his brother’s immigration status last weekend. And so now Heritage has filed another legal challenge. This time, Heritage’s argument is not “we need the records to see if Harry lied!” This time, the argument is “ANY drug use should have prohibited his residency in America.”

A right-wing think tank has launched a fresh legal challenge against the Biden Administration over Prince Harry’s US visa records, claiming there was “no proper method” for his admission to America. The Heritage Foundation’s latest court filing seeks to overturn a judge’s earlier decision to terminate their case, which aimed to force the release of the Duke of Sussex’s immigration documents.

The organisation’s lawyers wrote in the filing, seen by Newsweek: “[Heritage] submitted there was no proper method by which the Duke of Sussex could have been admitted.”

The case had previously been dismissed in September by Judge Carl J. Nichols after he privately reviewed confidential Department of Homeland Security files. The Heritage Foundation argues that the sealed nature of the judge’s reasoning denied them the opportunity to challenge the DHS’s private disclosures.

The Heritage Foundation’s case centres on Prince Harry’s past drug use disclosures during the US immigration process. The think tank contends that if the prince was honest about his previous drug use, he should have been denied entry to America.

In his earlier ruling, Judge Nichols addressed Heritage’s argument that Harry either disclosed his drug use and was “admitted inappropriately” or failed to disclose it entirely. A recent Government filing responded to these claims, stating: “The evidence before the Court plainly sufficed to show that [Heritage’s] speculation of impropriety was unfounded.”

Heritage’s lawyers have now clarified their position, asserting they were actually arguing that it would have been impossible for Harry to have been properly admitted to America through any means. Heritage’s challenge focuses heavily on the sealed nature of Judge Nichols’ decision-making process. The think tank argues that the confidential handling of DHS files prevented them from properly contesting the department’s private disclosures to the judge.

Their lawyers maintain that if the Department of Homeland Security had “paroled” the Duke of Sussex into the country, it would be both “illogical and illegal.”

[From GB News]

We’ve gone from “we just want to look at his records to double-check that he didn’t lie about drugs” to “actually, we meant to say that if he admitted any kind of past, casual drug use, he should not be allowed to live in America!” The thing is, this kind of ridiculous bullsh-t will find a home in the incoming Trump administration. The new administration is going to be teaming with Heritage’s dumbf–k fascists, and you don’t think one of them will end up at DHS? What I’m saying is that it’s probably inevitable that Harry’s visa records will be made public, probably handed right over to the Mail and the Telegraph. I just hope Harry has really good immigration lawyers in California, because this whole thing has been lunacy.

Top 8 Stories about the Heritage Foundation targeting Prince Harry

The ultra right wing Heritage Foundation has been trying to deport Prince Harry since Spare came out! Sign up for our mailing list and get the top 8 stories about the Heritage Foundation targeting Prince Harry! – Katie at Celebitchy

Email

First Name

Subscribe

Loading…

Thank you!

You have successfully joined our subscriber list.

Photos courtesy of Netflix.