On Sunday, President Joe Biden pardoned his only living son, Hunter Biden. Hunter was convicted, earlier this year, of three felonies associated with buying a gun while in the throes of addiction. The prosecution of Hunter Biden was always intended as a political attack on his father, and while Hunter absolutely had/has issues, very few in the legal and law enforcement community actually believed that Hunter should be imprisoned for years for these felonies, which is what would have happened. Now that Donald Trump is the incoming president and Joe Biden is going to retire to Delaware, Biden changed his mind. He said back in June that he wouldn’t pardon Hunter. That was before he was squeezed out of his reelection campaign. That was before Trump “won.”

President Biden issued a full and unconditional pardon of his son Hunter on Sunday night after repeatedly insisting he would not do so, using the power of his office to wave aside years of legal troubles, including a federal conviction for illegally buying a gun and for tax evasion.

In a statement issued by the White House, Mr. Biden said he had decided to issue the executive grant of clemency for his son “for those offenses against the United States which he has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from Jan. 1, 2014, through Dec. 1, 2024.”

He said he made the decision because the charges against Hunter were politically motivated and designed to hurt him politically. “The charges in his cases came about only after several of my political opponents in Congress instigated them to attack me and oppose my election,” Mr. Biden said in the statement. “No reasonable person who looks at the facts of Hunter’s cases can reach any other conclusion than Hunter was singled out only because he is my son — and that is wrong.”

He added: “There has been an effort to break Hunter — who has been five and a half years sober, even in the face of unrelenting attacks and selective prosecution. In trying to break Hunter, they’ve tried to break me — and there’s no reason to believe it will stop here. Enough is enough.”

It was a remarkable turnaround for a man whose presidency and five-decade career was built in part on the idea that he would never interfere with the administration of justice. In 2020, he made the case that former President Donald J. Trump should be ousted from office to restore that kind of independence in America’s democracy, and he argued the same in 2024. But in his statement, Mr. Biden sought to make the case for interfering after all, accusing his political enemies of going after his son in ways that anyone else would not have been. He said that he still believed in the justice system, but added, “I also believe raw politics has infected this process and it led to a miscarriage of justice — and once I made this decision this weekend, there was no sense in delaying it further.”

[From The NY Times]

The “I thought you believed in the justice system” line of attack is so stupid, as is the line of “he made the case that former President Donald J. Trump should be ousted from office to restore that kind of independence in America’s democracy.” One man incited an insurrection on the nation’s Capitol, another man pardoned his son after a malicious political prosecution on gun charges. They are not the same. And Americans clearly wanted the insurrectionist anyway. Speaking of, the Times does note that Trump has made a lot of noise about even more retribution and revenge against the Biden family for his second term. I do not blame President Biden at all for pardoning his son. Apparently, Pres. Biden told Hunter about his plans to pardon him over the Thanksgiving holiday. It would not surprise me at all if Biden made the final choice to pardon Hunter right after he went to church on Sunday.

Anyway, Trump has promised pardons for all of the January 6th insurrectionists. In his first term, he pardoned many of his biggest political allies, some of the biggest nutjobs in the country – Joe Arpaio, Dinesh D’Souza, Paul Manafort, Roger Stone, Michael Flynn, Stephen K. Bannon, and George Papadopoulos, just to name a few. If you’re mad about Hunter Biden’s pardon, keep that same energy for all of these f–kers.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

The Princess of Wales’s annual piano recital is scheduled for Friday. The “Together at Christmas” caroling show will be filmed at Westminster Abbey, and then aired on ITV on Christmas Eve. In years past, the event has not gotten any kind of high viewership, but it’s considered a success because everyone has agreed that this kind of busywork suits Kate, especially since Kensington Palace staffers are the ones largely organizing the whole mess. This year, Kate “wrote” a letter to carol-service attendees, and the royal reporters are trying to hype it.

The Princess of Wales has described the importance of “taking ourselves away from the pressures of daily life” and finding “space to live”, as she gradually returns to public duties after cancer treatment. Before hosting her annual Together at Christmas carol service for 1,600 guests at Westminster Abbey on Friday, Kate has written to people who will attend smaller, community carol services across the country in the coming weeks.

In the emotional letter, which uses the word “love” 11 times, she said that when people can “stop” for a moment — as she has done this year while receiving treatment — they can find the time to live with “an open heart, with love, kindness and forgiveness”.

Since completing her chemotherapy in the summer, after being diagnosed with cancer at the start of the year and taking several months away from public life, Kate, 42, has signalled that her recovery is ongoing and her return to public duties will continue to be gradual.

At her carol service on Friday, she will be joined by the Prince of Wales and, it is thought, their three children, Prince George, 11, Princess Charlotte, 9, and Prince Louis, 6, who all attended last year.

In the letter, sent to guests attending 15 nationwide services in locations including Aberdeen, Cornwall, Northern Ireland and Wales, Kate wrote: “It [Christmas] is a time for celebration and joy, but it also gives us the opportunity to slow down and reflect on the deeper things that connect us all.

“It is when we stop and take ourselves away from the pressures of daily life, that we find the space to live our lives with an open heart, with love, kindness and forgiveness.”

[From The Times]

The thing that sort of kills me about Kate and Charles in particular using the language of WASP Christianity is that they do not give two f–ks aout love, kindness or forgiveness and we’ve seen that in abundance in the past decade. Kate is a racist mean girl who openly worried about the skin color of her mixed-race nephew. Kate is the same person who launched a years-long character assassination on a sister-in-law. And don’t get me started on the privilege of “take ourselves away from the pressures of daily life.” Ol’ girl has done a half-dozen work events in the past twelve months, what “pressures of daily life”?

The Times also confirmed other details about the Christmas caroling thing – William will give a reading, as will Adam Peaty, Richard E. Grant, Sophie Okonedo and Michelle Dockery.

A special letter, reflecting on the importance of love, empathy and how much we need one another in the most difficult times. This will be given to each of the guests at the Together at Christmas Carol Service at Westminster Abbey and the fifteen Community Carol Services across… pic.twitter.com/BpHsHHPFKI

— The Prince and Princess of Wales (@KensingtonRoyal) November 30, 2024

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Instar, Cover Images.

This has been one of the dumbest, low-stakes royal soap opera in a while. The whole thing started last year, when King Charles evicted the Sussexes from Frogmore Cottage, and simultaneously began a pressure campaign to force Prince Andrew to leave Royal Lodge and move into the now-vacant Frogmore Cottage. Whenever Charles wanted a non-Sussex headline, he would leak sh-t about how much he hates Andrew and how Andrew will be forced out of RL eventually. Things came to a head in recent months when Charles reportedly cut off Andrew’s privately-funded security AND cut off Andrew’s general “allowance.” And yet, Andrew told the Crown Estates people that he had plenty of money to keep his lease on RL, and the news was said to be “comprehensively humiliating” for Charles, who looked petty, stupid and too ineffectual to finagle Andrew out of a huge mansion. So obviously, someone had to spread a rumor about how Charles was behind Andrew’s sudden windfall. Face-saving measure, my old friend.

As parlour games go, the subject of who has stepped in to fund Prince Andrew’s future in the white-stuccoed grandeur of Royal Lodge, Windsor, has been the only one in play for weeks. Since the revelation that the Duke of York had secured a cash lifeline for the 30-room mansion, the hunt for his mysterious benefactor has consumed London society. Who, everyone wants to know, has the resources to go up against King Charles, following his demands that his brother downsize to the more modest Frogmore Cottage, once the home of the Sussexes?

Wealthy names from the Middle East to the Russian steppes have been in the frame, but now I can reveal there are some in aristocratic circles who believe the Prince’s secret patron is someone far closer to home. In fact, he may own a rather grand property right next door. They suspect the ‘eviction’ threat is an elaborate double bluff by the King. I have heard from multiple sources that, far from cutting Andrew off, Charles has personally cleared his errant brother’s bills for his upkeep and promised his Royal Lodge woes are taken care of, enabling him to stay there for the foreseeable future.

The question isn’t how he’s done it, but why. Why would the monarch cut through the chaos of Andrew’s finances and social life to salvage his brother’s position in the wake of the Jeffrey Epstein scandal? The first person to suggest the King has opened his private purse on behalf of his brother was someone once close to Andrew.

‘He [Andrew] just doesn’t have that many friends any more. He barely goes out, he’s not that welcome anywhere,’ says the source. ‘So it’s got to be family, and the obvious person is the King. I mean, why would anybody who’s not family want to give him money when they’re not going to get anything out of it except a lot of flack?’

I would barely have believed it had the same story not been shared at another glamorous – and usually ultra-discreet – dinner table just a few days later. ‘Charles has paid for it all,’ revealed someone who’s been a guest at Royal Lodge in years gone by. ‘The King has cleared it. It’s all done.’

For clarity, my companion was adamant the funds were not from the public purse but from the monarch’s personal pocket. ‘Private funding,’ they confided. Were this correct, there’s probably a trail leading to the Duchy of Lancaster. That’s the property empire that provides the monarch with their personal wealth. While the Sovereign Grant, the official mechanism for supporting the King, is transparent, the Duchy is a more private matter between him and his accountants. The net surplus of the Lancaster estate was £27.4 million in 2023/24, according to accounts published last July. That would be ample to cover Andrew’s costs.

[From The Daily Mail]

So one of the Mail’s gossip columnists has heard gossip from well-connected people that Charles secretly funnelled millions to Andrew… after Charles wouldn’t shut up about how he cut off Andrew’s security and his allowance, and after Charles spent the better part of two years on a very public campaign to force Andrew to leave RL? No. What happened is that Andrew had money stocked away for a rainy day and Charles is still really mad about it, but he also wants to take credit for “Andrew is staying at RL.” In any case, the Daily Beast’s “palace sources” were “quick to pour cold water on the claims that Charles had pulled off a ‘double bluff’ and was secretly funding Andrew. Palace sources were quick to rubbish the faintly-sourced story, pointing out curtly that it seemed to be based on ‘dinner party speculation’ and ‘gossip.’” Charles had to take a massive L on this whole fiasco, and not only that, he can’t take credit for being generous or smart enough to help his brother.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

Over the Thanksgiving holiday here in America, I think Buckingham Palace’s comms office did some extensive briefings about what the rest of 2024 will look like for the left-behind royals. That would explain Richard Eden’s very strange story about how courtiers insist that they will welcome back the Sussexes any day now. It would also explain why the rota is breathlessly reporting something which was widely assumed: that the Princess of Wales will go to Sandringham for Christmas. Per the Mirror, “Kate Middleton makes huge Christmas decision with William and Charles after cancer fight.” The “huge decision” is that she’ll have lunch with the royals on Christmas Day, I guess?

Kate and William have decided to join the King for Christmas as the royals unite following the family’s year-long cancer battle. The festive celebration will mark the first time the royal family have come together en-masse after a tumultuous year for the monarch and the Princess of Wales, who were diagnosed with the disease within days of each other. King Charles and Kate even spent time in the same hospital at the same time over several days in January. The King was said to have ‘toddled’ down the hospital corridor to comfort his beloved daughter-in-law as they both recovered from surgeries.

Royal sources have revealed how the King is ‘delighted’ to have the Prince and Princess and their three children – Prince George, 11, Princess Charlotte, nine and Prince Louis, six – confirmed for Christmas and has already been making plans to celebrate with them and his extended family after such a difficult year.

The King has this week been preparing his Sandringham home ready to welcome the family to Norfolk for the festive holidays. Royal sources revealed how Charles has been touring the estate and main house this week, busy liaising with staff about Christmas plans. The King returned to London briefly on Tuesday to continue his weekly treatment plan as well as presenting credentials to foreign ambassadors and high commissioners at Buckingham Palace. But he swiftly returned to Sandringham on Wednesday to carry on with his Christmas planning.

A royal insider said: “The King is embracing the Christmas period already and really getting into the spirit. Staff who have seen him this week remarked how happy and healthy he was looking.”

Other family members expected to attend include the King’s embattled brother Prince Andrew, despite being exiled from official royal duties in 2019 amid his association with the late paedophile billionaire Jeffrey Epstein. Sources suggest the King has underlined his commitment to having the family united, especially over the Christmas period. The Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh and their two children, Lady Louise, 20 and James, Earl of Wessex, 16, are also expected to join. The King will host the traditional Christmas Eve black tie dinner where the family exchange presents, normally with a comical slant.

[From The Daily Mirror]

This reminds me of that weird story in October, about how the Windsors are not “pressuring” Kate to join them for Christmas. Again, it seems like everyone is writing and speaking about Kate like she’s already separated from her husband, and like she needs to confirm her appearances separately from William. I guess people really were waiting for this confirmation that Kate is going to spend the holiday in Norfolk with the Windsors. Although I imagine Carole and Michael Middleton will be camped out at Anmer Hall, if they aren’t already. That would have been Kate’s only other option – spend Christmas in Bucklebury, at Middleton Manor. But I get the feeling that if Kate wanted a Bucklebury Christmas, William would have had the kids in Norfolk regardless.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

Judging from the wealth of “no sh-t Sherlock” royal stories coming out in recent days, I feel strongly that Buckingham Palace courtiers did a major briefing for the royal rota during Thanksgiving week (here in America). There were widespread confirmations that Prince William and Kate would “join the king” for Christmas in Norfolk, and confirmations that Prince Andrew was also welcome at Sandringham. As long as palace courtiers were confirming royal Christmas plans, why not also suggest to Richard Eden that the Sussexes “would be welcomed back” if they gave up everything they have in America. And of course, until that happens, the Sussexes are never going to be invited to spend Christmas at Sandringham:

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will not be joining the royal family for Christmas at Sandringham this year.

A source tells PEOPLE that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have not received an invitation to this year’s royal Christmas gathering at Sandringham. The couple, who are expected to spend the holidays in the U.S., haven’t taken part in Christmas with the royal family since 2018, the year they married.

Harry, 40, and Meghan, 43, were also not invited to Trooping the Colour in June of this year, the annual birthday celebration for King Charles, which came a month after Harry and his father didn’t meet up when the Duke of Sussex was in the U.K. for the tenth-anniversary celebration of the Invictus Games. At the time, a spokesperson for Prince Harry attributed the missed reunion to the King’s “full schedule,” amid ongoing tensions between Harry and both his father, Charles, and his older brother, Prince William.

Prince William, his wife Kate Middleton, and their three children Prince George, Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis are set to spend Christmas at Sandringham, though both Buckingham Palace and Kensington Palace (where the Prince and Princess of Wales’ office is located) declined to comment on the Christmas guest list.

[From People]

While this is not a surprise – King Charles hasn’t invited the Sussexes to any holiday or birthday party since his reign began – it’s worth pointing out how all of this is obviously coming from the same series of palace briefings. In the same briefing, they confirmed that Charles invited Andrew and the Yorks to Sandringham, because Charles’s rationale is that Christmas is a family holiday and it’s all a “private celebration.” Yet when a potential olive branch could have been offered to the Sussexes using the same private/family rationale, it’s rejected. For reasons! Follow my train of thought here: I’ve always been shocked by Charles’s inability to manipulate the Sussex situation into his favor. He could publicly invite the Sussexes and say, on the record, that he would love nothing more than to see Archie and Lili for Christmas. Then, if the Sussexes reject his invitation, they would look like a–holes and Charles would look like the magnanimous grandfather who just wanted to put pettiness aside for the holidays. Instead, Charles looks petty and hateful. As always.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.

Embed from Getty Images

Before Friday (Nov 29), Taylor Swift had not attended a Kansas City Chiefs game in several weeks. To be fair, she’s still on tour and those games coincided with some of her concert dates. Her Eras Tour isn’t officially wrapped up until Vancouver next weekend. I imagine she wanted to have off for Thanksgiving, which was probably spent with her parents. She brought her dad Scott Swift to Friday’s game in Kansas City as well. Did they all fly in for the game? Or were they already in Kansas City and they celebrated Thanksgiving with Travis? I would love to know. (Correction: it does not appear that Tay’s mom went to the game, my bad.)

Taylor wore a Louis Vuitton pullover, skinny jeans and chunky-heel boots for the game. The LV shirt is “Chiefs red.” It’s been interesting to see her theme-dress during this season, and she’s been going more for major designer looks in red, as opposed to vintage Chiefs gear (which is what she wore last season). She also wore a ruby and diamond “87” necklace – Travis’s number is 87. WWD is making a big deal over Taylor’s skinny jeans, which are considered “retro” these days, since wide-leg and flared jeans are coming back into style.

As for the game, I saw that people were mad about it online. The Chiefs won another squeaker, from what I understand. They defeated the Las Vegas Raiders, 17-19. The Chiefs have only lost one game this season, and it was a game Taylor did not attend. Chiefs fans and Swifties are now united in believing that Taylor has some kind of special “Tayvoodoo” which helps the Chiefs win, and often win ugly. Taylor absolutely looked like she was casting some white-girl witch spells for her man.

this was the exact moment tayvoodoo was enacted pic.twitter.com/z6CBCk4JHM

— babes dont threaten me(ghan) with a good time (@babyouremyqueen) November 29, 2024

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Getty.

In many ways, Matt Gaetz had to withdraw his nomination as Donald Trump’s Attorney General because he is so profoundly hated within the Republican congressional caucus. Even though he was a House member, Republican senators absolutely loathe him and they weren’t going to vote to confirm him. Compare that situation with Pete Hegseth, someone who has never served in elected office before. Hegseth is Trump’s pick for Secretary of Defense. While Hegseth has a military background, the most important factors for Trump were: Hegseth looks “good” on TV as a Fox News analyst and Hegseth has a violent hatred of women (just like Trump). In 2017, a woman accused Hegseth of drugging and raping her in a California hotel. The woman did the most to see Hegseth charged (he was not) and now she’s doing the most to make sure her story is out there ahead of his Senate confirmation hearing. But that’s not all – Hegseth is a white Christian nationalist who is on his third marriage, he wants to ban women and gay folks from serving in the military, and even his mother thinks he’s a piece of sh-t.

The mother of Pete Hegseth, President-elect Donald J. Trump’s pick for secretary of defense, wrote him an email in 2018 saying he had routinely mistreated women for years and displayed a lack of character.

“On behalf of all the women (and I know it’s many) you have abused in some way, I say … get some help and take an honest look at yourself,” Penelope Hegseth wrote, stating that she still loved him. She also wrote: “I have no respect for any man that belittles, lies, cheats, sleeps around and uses women for his own power and ego. You are that man (and have been for years) and as your mother, it pains me and embarrasses me to say that, but it is the sad, sad truth.”

Mrs. Hegseth, in a phone interview with The New York Times on Friday, said that she had sent her son an immediate follow-up email at the time apologizing for what she had written. She said she had fired off the original email “in anger, with emotion” at a time when he and his wife were going through a very difficult divorce.

In the interview, she defended her son and disavowed the sentiments she had expressed in the initial email about his character and treatment of women. “It is not true. It has never been true,” she said. She added: “I know my son. He is a good father, husband.” She said that publishing the contents of the first email was “disgusting.”

[From The NY Times]

I mentioned Matt Gaetz’s withdrawn nomination at the start of the post because I find it interesting and telling that Hegseth’s nomination hasn’t gotten to a similar point. Even in the most generous reading of the rape accusation, Hegseth’s argument is that he had consensual sex with a drugged woman who was likely unconscious for several hours during those hours in his hotel room. Like, that’s HIS defense. What I’m saying is that Hegseth would have withdrawn his nomination if there were already senators saying “absolutely not,” as they were in Gaetz’s case. It’s extremely gross that so many Republican senators are taking a wait-and-see approach to Hegseth’s confirmation hearing. As for his mother’s comments… yeah. He’s on his third marriage, he’s been credibly accused of drugging and raping a woman, he’s cheated on at least one of his wives, and he’s a g-ddamn white nationalist.

Photos courtesy of YouTube, Instagram.

The trailer for Liza: A Truly Terrific Absolutely True Story. [OMG Blog]
Gemma Chan looked heavenly in Glavan at the Tasaki event. [RCFA]
Analysis of the “Ben Affleck is as happy as ever” exclusive. [LaineyGossip]
Stories about horrible hotel guests. [Pajiba]
Sean Combs spent Thanksgiving in jail. [Socialite Life]
The most shocking & heartbreaking documentaries. [Buzzfeed]
Dreamcasting The Seven Husbands of Evelyn Hugo. [JustJared]
Photos from the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day parade. [Hollywood Life]
Donald Trump wants to replace journalists with pod-bros. [Jezebel]
A reunion for A League of Their Own’s cast. [Seriously OMG]

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have made it abundantly and repeatedly clear that they will never move back to the UK on a permanent basis. Their first offer, back in 2020, was only to spend part of the year in the UK and maintaining their royal patronages. That was rejected by Queen Elizabeth II, Charles and William. The goal for some within the monarchy was to finagle a way to get Prince Harry divorced, humbled, broke and begging for forgiveness. In the past five years, the Sussexes have set themselves up brilliantly – they own a beautiful mansion, they have a successful business, they have millions in the bank. Harry is a successful author, they both have a lot of investments and interests in the US. So it’s bizarre that courtiers continue to repeatedly insist that they believe Harry is desperate to come back to the UK. It’s been five years – why are the king’s courtiers (or William’s courtiers) still yammering about this? From the Mail’s latest Eden Confidential column:

Netflix released its trailer for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s tacky-sounding series about polo last week, with the royals’ favourite pastime breathlessly described as ‘a sexy sport – dirty, sweaty boys riding’. A world away, the Duchess of Edinburgh had an announcement of her own – that she had become the royal patron of Plan International UK, a global children’s charity of which the late Prince Philip was formerly patron. Separately, Sophie later met survivors of the Yazidi genocide in Iraq at their photography exhibition, The Women Who Beat ISIS, in London.

There is no denying that Harry and Meghan have done admirable work for charity – particularly through their Archewell Foundation. But the contrast between Sophie’s heartfelt work and the Sussexes’ latest unregal, money-making project highlights the markedly different paths their lives have taken.

However, Palace sources have made clear to me that Sophie and her husband Prince Edward could point the way for Prince Harry and Meghan to return to royal duties.

Courtiers are increasingly convinced that Harry wants to resume his old way of life, when he felt he was using his privileged position to make a difference for worthwhile causes.

‘Harry’s heart is not in the TV stuff – anyone can see that,’ one source told me.

It’s notable that Harry does not seem to feature much in the polo series himself, even though he is a keen player. In the trailer, only his name appears, in a production credit alongside that of his wife. After King Charles’s cancer treatment was announced in February, Harry let it be known via friends that he was willing to take on a temporary royal role in support of his father. His offer was never taken up, but the California-based Prince is understood to be keen to spend more time in his homeland.

Meghan’s lifestyle business, American Riviera Orchard, is yet to sell a single product almost nine months after it was launched online amid great fanfare. The couple’s deal with audio giant Spotify was ended unceremoniously and their contract with Netflix comes up for renewal next year, so their thoughts may well be turning to how to return to royal roles – and the funding that goes with it. And that’s where Edward and Sophie come in.

Although most people have long forgotten, Queen’s Elizabeth’s youngest son and his wife were caught up in controversies of their own after they tried to combine business with royal duties. Yet the couple decided to abandon their paid work and concentrate on royal duties. In return, the late Queen Elizabeth stuck by them and they have gone on to become much-loved and respected stalwarts of ‘The Firm’ over the past 20 years. True, they will never be paid millions by foreign firms, but they live a privileged and rewarding life.

‘If the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are prepared to give up their private work and return to royal life, they would be welcomed back,’ one courtier tells me. ‘Certainly, as long as King Charles is monarch.’

Therein lies a warning to the Sussexes: Prince William is unlikely to be as forgiving as his father. And, given Harry and Meghan’s disgraceful attacks on the Princess of Wales, in particular, I can fully understand why.

[From The Daily Mail]

Something nice: at least Eden isn’t claiming that he’s speaking to sources close to the Sussexes and putting these words in Harry’s mouth (which has been done before). No, this is directly coming from Charles’s people, a promise that if the Sussexes end all of their businesses and charitable work in America, they would be “welcomed back” but only during Charles’s reign. When Charles dies, I guess they’ll have to go back to America, huh? No, that’s not actually the royalist fantasy – the fantasy is that Charles and William will both be able to control the Sussexes completely. It’s all based on Charles and William smoking their own supply too, this idea that Harry’s heart isn’t into anything they’re doing in America.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red and Cover Images.

A lot of us really hoped that the Duchess of Sussex would drop some kind of American Riviera Orchard product line before Christmas, so we could support ARO and Meghan by buying those products as gifts. But it’s not going to happen. Or at least, it’s probably not going to happen in 2024. It looks like Meghan is still dealing with the bureaucracy of launching a brand, and her lawyers have asked for an extension from the trademark office.

The Duchess of Sussex has asked officials for three more months to get her lifestyle brand up and running. Lawyers for the Duchess, 43, have requested an extension in her attempt to trademark her commercial venture American Riviera Orchard.

It comes after her initial application to trademark the name was refused by the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) in September, after which she was given three months to address the issues or face having the application dropped.

She has now asked for a further three-month extension to address the filing issues for her brand, which will promote a domestic idyll through the sale of jams, nut butters and home goods. If the next deadline is missed, the Duchess will have to start the application process again with the USPTO, which rejected the first try after noting that businesses cannot trademark geographical locations.

It said that American Riviera was a “common nickname” for Santa Barbara, the California city where Prince Harry and Meghan reside, and argued the addition of the word Orchard “does not diminish the primarily geographical descriptiveness of the applied for mark”.

The Duchess had already soft-launched her brand with a slick video and a website created on March 14 that remains a holding page inviting supporters to join a waiting list that keeps them updated about “products, availability and updates”.

[From The Telegraph]

It’s been years of the British media trying to make “trademark issues” into a global scandal. But this time, I actually think there’s something interesting going on – it really does not feel like ARO is anywhere close to launching. It really does not feel like ARO will have anything to sell whenever Meghan’s cooking show comes out, which will probably be in January or February? Unless this is all a feint and Meghan will come out with everything all at once whenever her Netflix show debuts?

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Instagram.