The Vogue World Paris 2024 event was held on Sunday and… I kind of think last year’s London event was more A-list. Also: Jared Leto is a try-hard. [Just Jared]
I wonder what Joaquin Phoenix’s Joker 2 promo tour will look like. [LaineyGossip]
Jennifer Lawrence’s new movie sounds great, honestly. [Hollywood Life]
Here’s more about Tom Cruise going to Taylor Swift’s concert. [Socialite Life]
Review of Thelma (which CB is raving about). [Pajiba]
Naeem Khan’s Resort collection is very cocktail-party intensive. [Go Fug Yourself]
Brandy made another horror film! [OMG Blog]
Details on Fan Bingbing’s Vogue World look. [RCFA]
Jerry O’Connell comes across like such a normal dude. [Seriously OMG]
Ree Drummond is going to be a grandmother. [Starcasm]
Democrats talk about what it’s like living in red states. [Buzzfeed]

The Princess of Wales’s reappearance, after nearly six months, should have been a turning point for the Windsors and the royalist media. They could have and should have kept it entirely positive and centered on the left-behind Windsors. Instead, over the past three or four days, it’s felt like the palace briefings and the British media is back to focusing a sh-t ton of ire, hate and weirdness on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. For what reason? Your guy just took a selfie with Taylor Swift? Why isn’t the Mail doing wall-to-wall coverage of THAT? Instead, the Mail published yet another interview with Toxic Thomas Markle. While it’s entirely possible that our archives are incomplete, Toxic Tom seemingly hasn’t given an interview since last September? A pretty long time to stay quiet. And honestly, he barely said most of these words – most (if not all) of these quotes were ghostwritten for him by someone in the British media. I’ve said that’s been happening for years and I still believe it. Some lowlights:

He’s turning 80 next month: ‘I never expected to make it to 80 because Markle men never do,’ he said last night. ‘My father died at 61. I’ve had a good life and I am proud of what I’ve accomplished, but everything has been overshadowed by what has happened in the last six years. I’ve never been one for birthdays, but I know the one person I most want to hear from, Meghan, won’t be in touch. I would love to meet my grandchildren, but I would be happy with a photograph at this stage.’

He’s still yammering about how he’s never met Prince Harry: ‘When I reflect back on my life, as you do when you are approaching 80, that’s one of the questions I cannot find an answer for. Why didn’t Harry ever come to meet me? He has the resources to fly around the world – and does – but why didn’t he come to see me, particularly when people in the royal household like Jason Knauf [Harry and Meghan’s former communications secretary] were urging him to do so? That has never made sense to me. What man gets married without meeting his wife’s father?’

He’s in the same boat as King Charles! Mr Markle feels ‘deep empathy’ for King Charles, who is ‘in the same boat’ as far as not seeing his grandchildren is concerned. ‘I would love to speak to him because I am sure he has as many unanswered questions as I do. Neither of us deserves the treatment we’ve received…I have so many questions I’d like to ask Meghan and Harry. The main one being, why have they treated not only me but the Royal Family and the King so badly.’

On Trooping the Colour: ‘It struck me as very sad that Meghan and Harry’s kids are being denied the right to know their cousins, who look like fantastic children. The relationship between cousins is a special one. There’s a unique bond. I feel sad that Lilibet and Archie don’t have the chance to get to know their cousins and take part in things like Trooping The Colour, which is their birthright. They are getting to the age where they will start asking questions, as all kids do. At some stage it’s inevitable that they will ask their parents why they have cut them off from both sides of the family? They have two grandpas who want to see them, one of whom is the King of England. I never in my 80 years thought I’d be in the same boat as the King.’

He’s still harping on about the photos before the wedding: ‘The one thing I never imagined was Meghan turning against me at this point in my life. I thought she would always be there for me. Meghan was mad at me because I posed for some paparazzi pictures before the wedding. I was totally alone and being hounded. A photographer went to my daughter Samantha and convinced her that the pictures would improve my image. It was a mistake and I have apologised for it repeatedly. When you look at what Harry and Meghan have done since, like accusing the Royal Family of racism, it’s far worse than anything I’ve done. I don’t want pity and I don’t want this episode to define my life. I don’t want to be a footnote in history.’

Meghan is entitled: ‘The person she’s become isn’t the girl I raised, but I wonder if they blame the Markle family for everything that has gone wrong. She started to change when she lived in Canada filming Suits and was hanging out with the Soho House [an exclusive members’ club and hotel chain] crowd. She began acting entitled. Things escalated after she met Harry. It upsets me that the Markle name is now associated with negativity. People talk about being ‘Markled’ when they get dumped for no reason. That saddens me.’

[From The Daily Mail]

As I said, these are all British media talking points. One of the biggest and dumbest tells is “people talk about being ‘Markled’.” That’s just some dumb Meghan-obsessed thing made up by the Mail and the Sun – it’s not an actual thing that people talk about when discussing the Sussexes. This is also a gigantic tell: “When you look at what Harry and Meghan have done since, like accusing the Royal Family of racism, it’s far worse than anything I’ve done.” Nothing like a white father siding with his Black daughter’s racist abusers and then publicly gaslighting her about it. Anyway, I hope we eventually learn who is ghostwriting all of Toxic Tom’s interviews at some point. I also hope we figure out why the British media and the Windsors are backsliding into all of this Sussex stuff right now.

Photos/screenshots courtesy of 60 Minutes Australia.

This Justin Timberlake stuff has gotten crazy. One week ago, Justin got sh-tfaced at a hotel bar in Sag Harbor, then he got behind the wheel. A cop pulled him over, Justin refused a breathalyzer but he was so visibly intoxicated that the cop arrested him for a DWI and other traffic violations. Justin spent the night in jail and he’s due in court next month. He quickly hired a lawyer and a crisis management team. The crisis management team is horrible!! They’re so bad, they have people siding with Southampton POLICE. Justin’s team is clearly going after the arresting officer, and certain media outlets are happy to go along with it:

The rookie Sag Harbor cop who pulled over pop superstar Justin Timberlake for alleged drunk driving is well-known in the ritzy town, according to a report. Officer Michael Arkinson, who turns 24 this month, stopped the “SexyBack” singer Tuesday morning after allegedly seeing him blow a stop sign and swerve in the right lane.

In just three months on the force, Arkinson has earned a reputation among Sag Harbor’s wealthy residents, earning nicknames like “the Sag Harbor Nazi” and “little red-headed dips–t” for his strict enforcement of traffic laws.

Despite Timberlake’s global fame, Arkinson, who wasn’t even born when Timberlake joined NSync in 1995, had no clue who he was dealing with. By the time Timberlake’s hit “Bye Bye Bye” topped the charts in 2000, Arkinson was just a toddler.

A writer from Shelter Island who identified himself as Spencer recounted an unpleasant encounter with Arkinson while searching for a parking spot in Sag Harbor and making a U-turn.

“I was surprised he pulled me over,” Spencer told the Daily Mail. “It was off-season, and no one was around. It was a d–khead move. I felt like he pulled me over just for the sake of doing it.”

Although Spencer received a warning, his next run-in with Arkinson wasn’t so lenient. Pulled over for talking on his cell phone, Spencer protested that he was using speakerphone.

“He told me I should have been using Bluetooth,” Spencer told the outlet. Despite his explanations, Arkinson slapped him with a $145 ticket. “I thought he would give me a break… It really interrupted my workout and lunch plans. ‘I think Justin Timberlake was a victim of over-aggressive Sag Harbor police,” he added.

[From The NY Post]

The NY Post and the Daily Mail are also running photos of the cop, they’re publishing details about his life (where he went to school) and his salary. Like… am I supposed to hate a cop who arrested a drunk driver? Am I supposed to be in my feelings about a cop who cites rich Hamptonites for violating the law? As I said previously, it’s ACAB most days, but this guy got a drunk driver off the road and that’s a good thing. Justin could have hurt someone. This is how bad it is for Justin Timberlake – people are siding with the cop and saying outright that it’s f–ked up that Timberlake’s team is doxxing the arresting officer.

A few more things – this same cop had already given Justin a warning several minutes before the arrest. The cop told Justin he shouldn’t be driving and let him go without any arrests or citations. Minutes later, the cop observed Justin behind the wheel, driving drunk on the wrong side of the road. Justin is such a dumbass, my god. Last thing: Justin’s team likely paid off the bartender to claim, to People Magazine, that Justin only had one drink at the bar. Sure.

Rookie Sag Harbor cop who arrested Justin Timberlake already well-known by locals for strict enforcement of traffic laws after just three months on the force https://t.co/cbaVdbwMmP pic.twitter.com/6Olv5uipy7

— New York Post (@nypost) June 22, 2024

Sag Harbor cop who didn’t recognize Justin Timberlake during DWI arrest is unmasked as rookie Michael Arkinson… and he’s been infuriating the Hamptons elite for months https://t.co/QNgzeDtomY pic.twitter.com/3RUuJaPNl5

— Daily Mail US (@DailyMail) June 22, 2024

Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Backgrid.

I didn’t realize that the Foo Fighters are back to touring, but they were also in London over the weekend, same as Taylor Swift. Taylor performed three nights in a row to sold-out crowds in Wembley Stadium. Foo Fighters played at London Stadium on Saturday night. When they were on stage, Dave Grohl tried to pump up the crowd by comparing the band’s concert to Taylor’s Eras concert. Tell me if you really think Grohl was being super-shady, because I don’t think he was.

Foo Fighters frontman Dave Grohl appeared to take a jab at Taylor Swift at the band’s concert on Saturday night at London Stadium. After mentioning that Swift’s Eras Tour was currently taking place at London’s Wembley Stadium, Grohl said on stage, “I tell you, man, you don’t want to suffer the wrath of Taylor Swift.”

He continued: “So we like to call our tour the ‘Errors Tour.’ We’ve had more than a few eras, and more than a few f–king errors as well. Just a couple.”

Grohl then implied that Swift doesn’t perform live, telling the crowd, “That’s because we actually play live. What? Just saying. You guys like raw, live rock ‘n’ roll music, right? You came to the right f–king place.”

Grohl has praised Swift in the past and even dedicated the Foo Fighters song “Congregation” to the pop star at the BBC Radio Big 1 Weekend in 2015. “I’m officially obsessed. She might want to get a restraining order because I’m all about Swift,” Grohl said at the 2015 U.K. music festival. “To my opening band, Taylor Swift. Taylor and the Swifts,” he added.

[From Variety]

Is it shady? A tad, but only if you think it’s shady to point out that Taylor uses backing vocals for most of the songs during her concerts. I’m not saying she’s just getting up there and lip-syncing everything and neither is Grohl. Taylor uses backing tracks AND she sings live. Foo Fighters play everything live with no backing tracks. Plus, I think Grohl was mostly just trying to pump up the crowd and get them hyped for the live rock experience.

Does anyone remember when Swifties sent Dave Grohl’s 17 year old daughter death threats for criticizing Taylor’s private jet usage?

Have you considered that she also uses a myriad of backing tracks live, whereas Foo Fighters does not, which is absolutely what he’s referring to? https://t.co/lhvVVP03Il

— noveltysongs (@noveltysongs) June 23, 2024

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

Last week, the Daily Mail’s Richard Eden had the big exclusive that Prince William 100% supports his father’s efforts to “slim down” the British monarchy. King Charles has long believed that the monarchy needs to support fewer royal cousins and royal-adjacents and that strict “working royal” boundaries must be enforced. This was always contingent on Prince Harry sticking around and Prince William and Kate’s marriage never collapsing. The events of the past six months should have shown Charles and William that their slimmed-down monarchy is pretty sad and threadbare. Instead, William is barreling ahead with a plot to slim the monarchy down even further during his reign (of terror). According to the Daily Beast’s sources, William and Kate plan to encourage Princess Charlotte and Louis to avoid becoming “working royals.” And it’s all about Prince Harry, obviously.

Prince Louis and Princess Charlotte, Prince William’s two younger children, are to be “encouraged to not become working royals” under radical plans to reshape the British monarchy when William and Princess Kate ascend the throne, following the disastrous impact on the family of Prince Harry’s vitriolic exit from royal life. One insider told The Daily Beast: “The working assumption is that the younger two children will get on and do their own thing. They will be encouraged to not become working royals.”

William and Kate’s office did not respond to a request for comment on the bombshell claims made by the insider, a former Buckingham Palace and Kensington Palace staffer who keeps in contact with former colleagues. They were speaking after a report in the Daily Mail said William not only agreed with his father King Charles’ drive to slim down the monarchy but would go even further. The report cited a friend as saying: “When the older members of the family retire, (William) won’t be inviting anyone else to become working royals. It remains to be seen if he will even want his two younger children to be working royals.”

The source said of the report, “It’s absolutely true. The option isn’t there for George, of course, but the children have been kept at arm’s length from royal life. They are exposed to the minimum possible publicity, and that is a deliberate strategy to let Charlotte and Louis choose their own destiny.”

A friend of the couple who spoke to The Daily Beast concurred with the report in the Mail saying: “It is no secret that William has been devastated by the destruction of his relationship with Harry. Although he absolutely puts the blame on Meghan and Harry, he does of course also appreciate that the whole system, where one of your kids is less important than the other due to an accident of birth, had a massive part to play in what happened and how it happened.”

“There is an entirely reasonable argument to be made that if you are born into the royal family, the logical thing to do is to leave it. The same logic applies to your kids, he doesn’t want to put them through a human mincer that is going to cause everyone misery. He and Catherine adore the children, and their whole lives are about the children. I think they want to find a practical solution to the ‘spare’ problem that has bedeviled the family for generations.”

Critics, of course, will argue that if the couple don’t want the children to take on formal royal duties, they should stop promoting them, and the royal family should stop using them to market itself….Defenders of the Waleses retort that they would like nothing better than for their children to grow up in total obscurity, but say that’s not realistic, and point out that the carefully staggered release of images of the children has largely achieved its primary goal of destroying the paparazzi market for such pictures.

As another friend of the family told The Daily Beast: “If you look at the spares who have made it work, you only really have Edward and Anne. Margaret’s life was pretty miserable. Harry we know all about. I’m sure William and Catherine don’t want history to repeat itself.”

[From The Daily Beast]

“He does of course also appreciate that the whole system, where one of your kids is less important than the other due to an accident of birth…” Until William comes to terms with the reality of the situation, he’s doomed to repeat it. It’s not that Harry was “less important” than him because of an accident of birth, it’s that Harry was neglected, pushed down, marginalized, denigrated and used as a human shield for his idiotic and lazy older brother. It’s not that Harry was somehow born less “important,” it’s that William smeared and abused his brother and sister-in-law to the point where they had to flee the country. The issue was not “Harry should have never been a working royal, that was the root of the problem!” It sure sounds like William and Kate believe that their kids will get to pick and choose their “working royal” status and probably even be “half-in.” That’s what they’re building up to. Once again, Harry and Meghan came up with a great solution and the Windsors have spent the past four-plus years tying themselves in knots to cry about how half-in royals are never allowed!

Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Kensington Palace.

Here are some photos from Day 4 of Royal Ascot. No joke, I’ve really enjoyed covering Ascot this year. Some Ascot years are boring from a fashion and gossip aspect, but this year’s Ascot had a lot of interesting storylines and hilariously bad fashion. It was especially well-attended this year, at least from the royals and royal-adjacents. Day 4 saw King Charles and Queen Camilla come out yet again (Camilla came for all four days), plus Princess Beatrice and Edo Mapelli Mozzi, Lord Frederick Windsor and his wife, plus Peter Phillips and his new girlfriend, Harriet Sperling. Peter and Harriet are Ascot-official now, which is probably a thing in some circles.

Fashion-wise, I am enjoying Beatrice’s green floral Emilia Wickstead. Royal women tend to wear very light colors to Ascot, although it’s not like a purely pastel color palette is enforced. Beatrice’s Wickstead really stood out and the silhouette was flattering on her too. Some people have suggested that her husband Edo is quite a dandy and he’s basically styling his wife. I don’t think so – I think Beatrice works with a stylist and she now has some kind of budget for designer clothes.

I also have to give a special mention to Camilla’s very absurd hat. Cam is truly in her Bonkers Hat Era these days. She wore those comically oversized hats around the D-Day anniversary events and she’s continued the “big hat” theme during Ascot. This Philip Treacy one might be my favorite? It just looks soft, I want to touch the feathers or whatever they are. Her dress was a snooze – Anna Valentine, and it’s not her color. Her brooch on Day 4 was the Jardine Star. That one was a favorite of QEII.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

Embed from Getty Images

William Lewis, a British editor, was appointed the Washington Post’s new CEO last November, and he officially started work at WaPo in January. For months, there wasn’t a ton of gossip about WaPo’s new CEO and the newsroom was pretty much operating as it always did. Then Prince Harry won a motion in his years-long lawsuit against News UK/The Sun – in Harry part of the lawsuit, he could cite names of journalists and editors who worked for Rupert Murdoch’s British media outlets. Harry can and will pinpoint the individual criminality of various editors and journalists who worked for Murdoch from 2000-2012, basically. One of those names is William Lewis, who worked as an editor for the Times of London.

When Harry won that motion, WaPo’s managing editor Sally Buzbee told Lewis that the paper planned to cover the case thoroughly, even if he was implicated. He leaned on her to try to influence coverage or convince her not to run any coverage. Then he announced his plan to significantly demote Buzbee and she quit. All hell broke loose. Lewis quickly announced the appointment of Robert Winnett to take over Buzbee’s position, although Winnett was only scheduled to take over post-election. Since Buzbee’s exit, the New York Times, the Guardian, assorted media watchdog groups and the Post itself have all done deeper dives into both Lewis and Winnett. What they’ve found is shocking – the criminality, the years-long claims of hacking and paying for illegally obtained information, the uncited political work and on and on. So far, Jeff Bezos – who owns the Post – has not fired anyone. But now Winnett is waving the white flag of surrender. He will no longer wash up on American shores.

Robert Winnett, the British journalist recently tapped to become editor of The Washington Post later this year, will not take the job and will remain at the Daily Telegraph in London, according to a company email sent to Post employees Friday morning.

The change of plans comes after days of turmoil surrounding The Post, triggered by the abrupt exit of executive editor Sally Buzbee on June 2 and questions about past journalistic practices of both Winnett and William Lewis, The Post’s CEO and publisher.

Lewis had announced Winnett’s hiring when Buzbee departed just 2½ weeks ago, along with plans for a “third newsroom” that would be tasked with attracting new audiences. Under the plan, former Wall Street Journal editor Matt Murray came on board to run news coverage until Winnett’s arrival, at which point Murray would have handed the reins to Winnett and run the new division in November after the election. Murray took over June 3 and was introduced to the newsroom; Winnett, who oversees news coverage at the Telegraph as a deputy editor, had not yet met The Post staff and was almost entirely unknown in American media circles.

Lewis and Winnett have faced accusations in recent days of using unethical newsgathering practices in Britain, where they previously worked together at the Telegraph and the Sunday Times — London newsrooms that sometimes operate by different rules than their American counterparts.

Telegraph editor Chris Evans announced in a memo to his staff Friday that Winnett had pulled out of The Post job and would remain his deputy at the London paper. “I’m pleased to report that Rob Winnett has decided to stay with us,” Evans wrote. “As you all know, he’s a talented chap and their loss is our gain.”

Lewis confirmed that Winnett had withdrawn from the position, relaying the news “with regret” in a note to Post staff Friday morning. “Rob has my greatest respect and is an incredibly talented editor and journalist,” Lewis wrote, adding that an outside firm would be used to conduct a “timely but thorough search” for a replacement.

[From WaPo]

LMAO. Robert Winnett didn’t want the American smoke. All of these British hacks think they can break into the American market and bring their unethical behavior and criminality over here and no one will say sh-t. They believe they will be embraced, or worse, they believe that they can recreate the British newsroom climate in America. My hope/prediction is that Bezos will eventually tell Lewis to go, although I expect it will be couched in “William Lewis is choosing to go of his own accord.” When will that happen… it depends on the pressure being exerted outside of the Post, honestly. The New York Times is full of Trump supporters, but they’ve done a good job of being loudly outraged by Lewis and Winnett’s hirings and their past activities in the British media. Journalists on both sides of the pond enjoy some blood-letting within their own ranks, it appears.

Puck did a hysterically outraged story about how WaPo journalists decided “to investigate both Lewis and Winnett to see if they could unearth unflattering information about the two men’s history in the U.K.” in recent weeks. Puck is calling this a “coup.” What the Post has done so far – report on itself and create a Chinese wall between Lewis’s management and the real journalism being done – is not a coup, it’s just plain ethical journalism. And it honestly should have been done months ago. It’s a pretty half-assed “coup” to only investigate the sleazy new CEO after he marginalized and demoted the female managing editor for daring to report on his activities.

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Getty.

Swimmer Lilly King swam in the Olympic trials (she qualified) and then her boyfriend proposed to her at the Trials. Do you love it or hate it? Like… she was at work, dude. She was focused on qualifying for the Olympics and he had to make it all about him. Plus, I think a proposal live on NBC is tacky as hell. [Just Jared]
Even People Magazine is clowning on Justin Timberlake. [LaineyGossip]
Horoscopes for Cancer Season. [OMG Blog]
Jenna Dewan gave birth to her third child. [Hollywood Life]
Some of these male models are so average-looking, right? [Socialite Life]
Emma Stone wore Brandon Maxwell on the Tonight Show. [RCFA]
Review of Inside Out 2. [Pajiba]
This is the first time I’ve realized that Luke Wilson is in Horizon. [Go Fug Yourself]
Train (the band) wants people to wear yellow to their concerts. [Seriously OMG]
Are the Kardashians becoming Christian influencers? [Starcasm]
More people clowning on Justin Timberlake. [Buzzfeed]

Out of all of the Kardashian-Jenners, I tend to give Kendall and Kylie Jenner the widest berth when it comes to how they deal with fame and celebrity. They became famous through Keeping Up with the Kardashians when they were 12 or 13 years old, before they had any concept of what they were doing, before they could really “consent” to being part of this circus. They still choose to be part of the family business as adults, to varying degrees, but I’m not surprised that Kendall and Kylie both seem to have a really f–ked up relationship with their “celebrity.” Speaking of, Kylie had some sh-t to say in this week’s episode of The Kardashians (the Hulu show) about how people still have so much sh-t to say about her appearance. Keep in mind, Kylie has been getting cosmetic work on her face and body since her teenage years.

On the June 20 episode, Kylie Jenner, 26, said to her sister, “It’s a miracle I still have confidence and can still look in the mirror and still think I’m pretty.”

The Kylie Cosmetics creator shared that after Paris Fashion Week in September, she got a lot of negative comments about her looks. She said she wanted to do a more minimal makeup look, because people tell her she wears too much, but then she’s criticized for doing too little.

“I hear nasty things about myself all the time,” she said in a confessional. “I think it’s just after 10 years of hearing about it, it just gets exhausting.” She said she’s “so numb” to people talking about her looks all the time and wonders why “the internet” thinks it’s okay.

“I went on a journey last year dissolving half of my lip filler,” Kylie continued. “I hate even having this conversation over and over and over again. It feels like it’s a waste of my breath because I think, with me, it is never going to change.”

Kendall wrapped her younger sister up in a hug, seeing how much the criticism weighed on her.

“Like, I’ve never cried about this before, but I guess it does affect me,” Kylie admitted. “People have been talking about my looks since I was 12 or 13, before I even got lip filler.”

“I think I’m a really strong and I was put in this position for a reason,” Kylie said in a confessional. “I do think of myself as a confident person… but I’m also human and there’s only so much someone can take.”

[From People]

I remember those photos of Kylie at the Gaultier show six months ago, when it was a major headline that people said Kylie looked “old” when she was doing a more natural makeup look. I do think she’s changing up her cosmetic work these days because she doesn’t want to look so “Instagram filtered in real life.” Kylie, Kim and Khloe all have that look in real life, like they’ve gotten so much done to their faces that they look permanently “filtered.” Anyway, I know people are yelling at Kylie because of the years of problematic messaging from the K-Js, but again… Kylie herself is damaged by her own family’s relationships with plastic surgery, image and fame. I find it sort of remarkable that Kylie is a somewhat functional person, because she would have been better off being raised by wolves.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Cover Images.

Britain’s general election is on July 4th, America’s Independence Day. Less than two weeks away. I will give Britain credit for this one thing: I love how your election cycle is so streamlined and brief. Here in America, the presidential election cycle basically lasts for three years. Britain spends six weeks trying to figure out who they’ll vote for and then it’s over and you guys have a new government. Smart. The two major political parties in Britain are the Conservatives (Tories) and Labour. Labour hasn’t been in charge since Gordon Brown in 2010. Fourteen years of Tory rule have brought the people Brexit, a terrible economy, a prime minister who couldn’t outlast a head of lettuce, and a marginalized standing on the world stage. None of that is actually the British royal family’s fault, which is probably why both Labour and the Tories are both pro-monarchy to varying degrees. It’s left to the smaller political parties to voice strong anti-monarchy sentiments. Parties like Reform UK. One Reform UK candidate is currently “in trouble” with the British media because of just how much she hates the monarchy.

A Reform UK candidate reportedly shared a post on social media branding the Royal family “benefit scroungers” and calling for the monarchy to be abolished. Jo Hart, who is running to be the MP for Aberdeenshire North and Moray East, shared the rant on Facebook in 2022, during the Bank Holiday weekend to mark Elizabeth II’s Platinum Jubilee, according to the Daily Mail.

The post reportedly claimed the royals had “never experienced the kind of hardship” faced by Britons struggling with the cost-of-living crisis and described the celebrations as a “hugely wasteful light show” and a “slap in the face to all of us common folk”.

Ms Hart admitted to sharing the comments, but said she did not write them herself, the Mail reported.

The emotive message was also said to include the phrases “f— the royals” and “make Lizzy the last”. Ms Hart is the latest in a string of Reform candidates to face criticism after controversial remarks emerged in the media, and the second aspiring MP in Aberdeenshire North and Moray East to become embroiled in a row after Labour’s candidate Andy Brown was accused of sharing pro-Russian material online in the wake of the Salisbury poisonings.

The post reportedly shared by Ms Hart stated: “But then the Jubilee comes along, for our ‘glorious monarch’ who has never experienced the kind of hardship having to choose between heating or food, she doesn’t have to worry about keeping the lights on or not, in fact, the many MANY millions that have been p—-d away on the Jubilee celebrations haven’t even come from her pocket, but from the public purse.”

[From The Telegraph]

Is she wrong?? LMAO. I love the British media’s air of indignance too, like how DARE a reform candidate not support a colonizer family which represents inherited wealth, white supremacy, dynastic privilege and institutionalized misogyny and racism?? That’s the whole point of the system! This is the whole circus! Anyway, the Windsors are not on the chopping block during this election. But make no mistake, Jo Hart and her anti-monarchist ilk seem to be growing in support and power.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.