For those of us paying attention in 2016 and 2017, the British media’s racist abuse of then-Meghan Markle was despicable. Then it became so much worse when Meghan married Prince Harry in 2018. As the Duchess of Sussex, she was subjected to a coordinated and racist character assassination, a campaign which still continues to this day. In Prince Harry’s Spare, he lays out in pretty simple terms the onslaught of racist coverage towards Meghan and the utter lack of support they received from the institution. Of course, we could easily argue that the institution was and is working in concert with the British media to feed this narrative of Meghan as an angry Black woman, the maniacal schemer who, in Jeremy Clarkson’s words, deserves to be stripped naked and marched through the streets. What’s worse is that the same British media which has abused Meghan for years is ALSO obsessed with gaslighting her about the racist abuse and minimizing what she’s been through. Enter Richard Eden’s Daily Mail column, where he interviewed a mixed-race opera singer who talked sh-t about Meghan.

Meghan Markle’s claims of widespread racism in Britain were described as ‘very unsettling’ by opera star Danielle de Niese in comments to the Mail last night. Like the Duchess of Sussex, De Niese is a prominent woman of colour in her profession who married into an white, upper-class British family intertwined with a famous institution.

However, the soprano, who is married to Gus Christie, executive chairman of the Glyndebourne opera festival, said did not appreciate the comments made by the Duchess during bombshell interviews with Oprah Winfrey.

‘What I think is strange is to get your home country of America to say that the entire country of Britain is racist… I find that very unsettling. It’s not to say that racism isn’t everywhere, because it is, but I don’t think you can tar everyone with the same brush like that. To say a whole community of people are racist, that hasn’t been my experience.’

The soprano, 43, whose parents are from Sri Lanka with mixed European heritage, spent her childhood in Australia before emigrating with her family to America as a teenager. Now chatelaine of the estate in the South Downs, East Sussex, where music lovers enjoy picnics on the lawn before watching the world-famous opera during the summer, she considers Britain to be her home.

She did not agree with Meghan and Harry’s slurs about ‘racism’ in the Royal Family – which the Prince rowed back from in recent interviews – saying Meghan should have followed her example.

‘I am a mixed-race person and I have married a man who is not in the Royal Family but is still part of a big institution,’ de Niese told the Mail. ‘I’ve set out to support my husband and learn about the people around me. I very much set about learning about what happens here. There were people who tried to imply that I was ”trailblazing”, but I wasn’t into that because it feeds the ego.’

The First Lady of Glyndebourne has two young children with Christie and is stepmother to his four sons from his first marriage. ‘When Meghan and Harry first came to public attention, everyone was super happy for them,’ she adds. ‘I feel like we’ll never really know why it went wrong. It’s a complex story.’

[From Eden Confidential]

I laughed at “I feel like we’ll never really know why it went wrong.” Harry and Meghan have told everyone what went wrong in very specific terms repeatedly, on camera and in print. If you choose to play dumb and participate in the British media’s gaslighting of a Black woman, then sorry, you’re as despicable as the British media. Meghan didn’t “slur” the Windsors nor did Meghan call the entire country “racist.” Both Meghan and Harry have said: it is the media and the institution of the monarchy. “To say a whole community of people are racist, that hasn’t been my experience” – so this B is leaving open the possibility that different women of color have different experiences?

As for “how dare you, America is racist too!” – like, we know. The difference is, America’s national media would never be able to run such a wall-to-wall racist character assassination on a prominent Black woman/public servant. It just wouldn’t happen, our media doesn’t function that way, it would be called out and newspapers and TV channels would lose advertisers.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

I wasn’t massively shocked by any of the Golden Globe, BAFTA or SAG awards nominations this year, mostly because I think this year’s awards season seems a little bit chaotic anyway. There’s an “anything goes” vibe, and while there were definitely early favorites, there is not (to my mind) one consensus film, a Parasite or a CODA. So, let’s get to it – here are some of the biggest Oscar nominations for 2023:

Best Picture:
All Quiet on the Western Front
Avatar: The Way of Water
Banshees of Inisherin
Elvis
Everything Everywhere All at Once
The Fabelmans
Tár
Top Gun: Maverick
Triangle of Sadness
Women Talking

Best Director:
The Daniels, ‘Everything Everywhere All at Once’
Steven Spielberg, ‘The Fabelmans’
Todd Field, ‘TÀR’
Martin McDonagh, ‘Banshees of Inisherin’
Ruben Ostlund, ‘Triangle of Sadness’

Best Supporting Actress:
Angela Bassett (“Black Panther: Wakanda Forever”)
Hong Chau (“The Whale”)
Kerry Condon (“The Banshees of Inisherin”)
Jamie Lee Curtis (“Everything Everywhere All at Once”)
Stephanie Hsu (“Everything Everywhere All at Once”)

Best Supporting Actor:
Brendan Gleeson (“The Banshees of Inisherin”)
Bryan Tyree Henry (“Causeway”)
Judd Hirsch (“The Fabelmans”)
Barry Keoghan (“The Banshees of Inisherin”)
Ke Huy Quan (“Everything Everywhere All at Once”)

Best Actress:
Cate Blanchett (“Tár”)
Ana de Armas (“Blonde”)
Andrea Riseborough (To Leslie”)
Michelle Williams (“The Fabelmans”)
Michelle Yeoh (“Everything Everywhere All at Once”)

Best Actor:
Austin Butler (“Elvis”)
Colin Farrell (“The Banshees of Inisherin”)
Brendan Fraser (“The Whale”)
Paul Mescal (“Aftersun”)
Bill Nighy (“Living”)

Adapted Screenplay
All Quiet on the Western Front
Glass Onion
Living
Top Gun: Maverick
Women Talking

Original Screenplay
The Banshees of Inisherin
Everything Everywhere all at Once
The Fabelmans
Tar
Triangle of Sadness

Costume
Babylon
Wakanda
Elvis
Everything Everywhere
Mrs. Harris Goes to Paris

Best Song:
“Applause” from Tell it Like a Woman
“Hold my Hand” from Top Gun: Maverick
“Lift me Up” from Black Panther: Wakanda Forever
“Naatu Naatu” from RRR – Music by M.M. Keeravaani, Lyric by Chandrabose
“This is a Life” from Everywhere Everywhere All at Once

Notable snubs: no Paul Dano for The Fabelmans, he got a SAG nomination but no Oscar nom. No acting nominations for Babylon, amazing, and that sad flop got snubbed for Best Picture and director. Two HUGE snubs in Best Actress, and both of them Black actresses: no Viola Davis (The Woman King) and no Danielle Deadwyler (Till). Oscars So White, yet again. While I didn’t think Viola was a huge contender for Best Actress this year, I thought she was a shoo-in for a nomination. They gave Ana de Armas a nomination for that f–king Marilyn disaster rather than Viola.

Notable unexpected noms: I was surprised by Brian Tyree Henry for Causeway. While critics said he was the best part of a meh movie, there hasn’t been much Oscar buzz. I was also not expecting to see Paul Mescal’s nomination, so I’m very happy for him and his fanbase. Andrea Riseborough’s weird Oscar campaign worked, and I’m so happy for Sarah Polley’s Women Talking too. Still, no women in Best Director, huh. Also: noms for Rihanna and Lady Gaga!

Photos and screencaps courtesy of Avalon Red, IMDB, Universal, Amblin, 20th Century Fox, Paramount, Marvel.

For the past five months, it’s actually been pretty quiet for Windsor-staff gossip. There was a changing of the guard at the very top with QEII’s death, but I expected more stories about “unsettled office staff” and warring factions within King Charles’s court. Now, I believe there are warring factions and we get glimpses of that war, but overall, the behind-the-scenes drama hasn’t spilled out to the public sphere. Yet. I was pleasantly surprised as I read this Mail story about how Sarah Ferguson is “back in the royal fold” thanks to Queen Camilla – buried at the end of the story, there are “below stairs” sources complaining about what it’s like under King Charles. Things have changed and it’s the most low-stakes gossip ever, but I loved it. Some highlights:

Fergie is back in, thanks to Camilla: A source said: ‘Camilla likes Sarah. They’re both gentry. They share a love of horses and Fergie will be smart enough to play the game with Camilla and realise she is the power behind the King. That she must be nice to them and support them.’

Fergie was welcomed at Sandringham this year: For years, her ex-husband Prince Andrew would take their daughters, Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie, to the celebrations, leaving Sarah out in the cold. This year, however, the Duchess was a guest not only for Christmas lunch, but also the following day’s shoot. It’s notable that the Boxing Day event was traditionally organised by Prince Philip, who would have blanched at the idea of inviting the Duchess.

The Yorks actually stayed at Wood Farm: The Mail on Sunday understands that both the Duke and Duchess of York – divorced but still living together – were not only invited to all the Christmas celebrations, they were even given the use of Philip’s former home, Wood Farm, during their stay. The cottage on the Sandringham Estate was where Philip spent his retirement, pottering about after fitting it out with a new kitchen and updating the heating.

Marmite Fergie: ‘There was Fergie, in the thick of it, chatting away to the King and Queen Consort on the Boxing Day shoot,’ the source said. ‘Philip would never have allowed that. There’s a feeling that, no matter what Sarah’s personal faults – and she can be like Marmite in that respect – she has been a good mother to the girls and loyal to Andrew.’

Camilla’s takeover at Sandringham: The thawing of relations with the 63-year-old Duchess, aides say, is indicative of a seismic shift in the family, led by the new Queen Consort. Camilla has taken over the Queen’s old rooms at Sandringham and both she and the King would prefer it to be run as a relaxed family home. A Royal insider said: ‘They want guests to have a homely experience, similar to Dumfries House [the Ayrshire mansion Charles saved].’

Camilla wants Sandringham to feel less like a hotel: ‘Camilla respects Sir Tony [Johnstone-Burt, head of the Royal Household] but perhaps sees things differently from him. The Queen Consort doesn’t want the homes and palaces run like the sort of corporate hotel you might find at a motorway service station. Camilla doesn’t want the towels put on the bed, but laid out on the rails in the bathrooms. She wants nice soap, not the same little individually wrapped soaps you get in a hotel.’

Discontented staff: Not all of the changes have been welcomed by Sandringham staff, many of whom served for decades under the previous regime. In the ‘Big House’, a housekeeper is leaving their post, the Mail on Sunday understands. And some say that the annual shoot was far better when Philip ran it. One source grumbled: ‘Today, the bird numbers are much lower because they’ve been overshot.’

Charles chats with staff: Previously staff had a habit of using the back stairs and made themselves scarce if they saw an approaching ‘MRF’ – Member of the Royal Family. ‘But Charles walks the corridors and wants to know where people are dashing off to,’ a source said. ‘He wants to stop and talk to them. They don’t understand it.’

LOL, staffers are mad at the heavier workload: If some are grumbling it was perhaps because the previous workload – with a retired Prince Philip and a nonagenarian Queen – was much lighter. Of the changing demands, one insider added diplomatically: ‘Old habits are hard to break. Let’s just say the teams at Buckingham Palace and Sandringham are quite busy these days.’

[From The Mail on Sunday]

These people, all of them, are so hysterically terrible. Camilla: what if we put the clean towels in the bathroom? Sandrinham Staff: HOW DARE YOU! And yes, the staffers are very mad that they have more work to do now, although Charles and Camilla did leave Sandringham for Scotland right after Christmas, whereas QEII would always stay at Sandringham through mid-February. And not to defend Camilla, but of course she wants things to run differently, that’s literally her prerogative.

As for the Fergie stuff… I’m not surprised that Fergie is back in the fold, but I am surprised that Camilla is making it into a class thing? I’m shocked that the Yorks were given Wood Farm to use over the holidays too. That was Philip and Elizabeth’s favorite place.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid, Cover Images.

This made me wince: Jeremy Renner has over 30 broken bones. [Seriously OMG]
Dakota Johnson really has a tone problem when talking/joking about Armie Hammer, a man who has been accused of abusing multiple women. [Dlisted]
The first image from Ted Lasso’s Season 3. [LaineyGossip]
Aubrey Plaza hosted SNL this weekend. [Pajiba]
Michelle Williams looked cute & fresh in London. [Go Fug Yourself]
Regal Cinemas is headed for bankruptcy?? [Gawker]
Lady Gaga is keeping a low profile because she’s hard at work. [Just Jared]
Letitia Wright wore Prada to the Beyonce concert in Dubai. [RCFA]
A new documentary (or docu-series) will expose the Duggars and other fundamentalist Christian cults. Good. They need to be exposed. [Starcasm]
It’s Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition Szn. [Egotastic]
Who should be the next CEO of Twitter? [Buzzfeed]
Sam Smith has thoughts on the BRIT Awards’ snubs. [Towleroad]

Long story short, the Daily Mail/ANL lies a lot about Prince Harry, in general, and specifically about his offer to pay for royal protection when he is in the UK. The Mail’s lies were so egregious that Harry sued them and and won – the High Court already made one ruling, last June/July, that the Mail’s reporting was defamatory. Since June, Harry’s lawyers and ANL’s lawyers have been trying to negotiate a settlement. They haven’t been able to come to an agreement, so now Harry is asking the High Court to give him a summary judgment.

The Duke of Sussex is to ask a High Court judge to rule in his favour without a trial in his libel case against the Mail on Sunday, as he aims to echo his wife’s legal success against the same newspaper. Prince Harry will apply for a strike out or summary judgment at a hearing due to be scheduled in the next two months after both sides failed to reach a settlement.

He sued Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) over an article published last February that said he had tried to keep “secret” parts of his legal fight with the Home Office over his security and had attempted to “spin” the dispute in his favour by claiming he had offered to pay for police protection. The piece suggested that when news of the Duke’s legal battle with the Government was first revealed, his PR team released a statement saying that he had offered to “pay personally for UK police protection”, but that it was refused. The Duke argued that the story suggested he had lied and had “improperly and cynically tried to manipulate and confuse public opinion”.

Legal proceedings were temporarily paused last month to allow both sides to negotiate, but they failed to reach a settlement before the deadline, last Friday.

In July, Mr Justice Nicklin ruled in the Duke’s favour in the first stage of the claim, concluding that the royal was defamed by parts of the story because it suggested that his actions were “discreditable” and that he had intended to “mislead the public”.

The amount recoverable by Harry in the event that he wins the claim has been set at £341,739 – almost half the £631,035 sought by the Duke.

Prince Harry is bringing two separate legal proceedings against the Home Office after being told he would no longer be given the “same degree” of personal protective security when visiting from the US.

[From The Telegraph]

Incidentally, while Harry hasn’t addressed this in his interviews and I’ve seen zero reporting about it, I genuinely believe that QEII arranged for her security to look after the Sussexes when they visited last April and again when the whole Sussex family came to the Jubbly on the Queen’s invitation. I think that was the only reason why Harry agreed to bring his children to the UK – because he got a guarantee from his grandmother that his family’s security would be taken care of. I genuinely wonder what the situation was last September though, with QEII dying and Harry and Meghan stuck in the UK for more than ten days (they were practically being held hostage). Speaking of, Harry has spelled out his terms for reconciliation with the Windsors and what he would need to come to the coronation, but I would bet that Charles hasn’t guaranteed security for the Sussexes either, not like QEII did.

As for Harry wanting a summary judgment… it sounds like a standard legal issue and I hope the judge grants it. I can’t believe that there’s a cap on libel damages – that’s so foreign to me as an American. British Lawyer Community: does the cap on damages include legal fees? As in, can ANL be ordered to pay Harry’s legal fees PLUS the maxed-out cap on damages?

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

For months now, Fox News, Tucker Carlson and the “anti-woke activists” have been very upset about… M&Ms. The candy. Specifically, M&M’s corporate “spokescandies,” the anthropomorphized M&Ms with individual personalities, the candies who appear in the print and television ads. As we were discussing one year ago, Mars did a makeover on the “lentils” and they specified that they were trying to make the anthropomorphized M&Ms more “inclusive.” Buh-bye trampy green M&M with her go-go boots. Green M&M got sensible sneakers and some of the M&Ms were slimmer or something. I don’t know. The point is, Fox News made this into yet another massive culture war. I swear, just last week, I saw a clip of Tucker Carlson frothing at the mouth about the M&Ms again!!! In any case, it looks like Mars was worried about the year-long Fox News backlash, so they made another change:

A message from M&M’S. pic.twitter.com/EMucEBTd9o

— M&M’S (@mmschocolate) January 23, 2023

What’s bizarre is… well, everything, but specifically – no one really had a problem with Green’s go-go boots in the first place!! We were like “yay, there’s the sexy green M&M, get yours!” Conservatives and liberals were actually on the same page of “why are you trying to de-sexify Green?” The difference was, liberals made some jokes and they moved on because, again, these are motherf–king M&Ms. It was the Fox News side of things that turned this into a culture war.

Now, do I feel sorry for Mars? Not really. This was stupid decision-making from start to finish, and abandoning their spokescandies will be seen as a victory for the lunatic right-wing. You can’t apply a Maya Rudolph band-aid to the larger problem. Although I do like Maya.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Instagram.

Princess Anne is still the only person in the immediate royal family to ever face criminal charges. I know, it’s wild that it’s Anne and not, say, Prince Andrew. Anne had to pay a £500 fine in 2001 after her dog bit two children in Windsor. Unlike her mother, Anne never had corgis – she has always favored English bull terriers, and she seems to get the most high-strung and poorly trained terriers out there. Her dogs are always attacking people and other animals. Well, it happened again, this time at a Christmas shooting party at Sandringham.

There’s nothing quite as shameful in British country circles as being the owner of an ill-trained hound that disrupts a day’s hunting or shooting. So one imagines Princess Anne will be appropriately mortified after one of her English bull terriers allegedly attacked a gamekeeper’s dog during a Royal Family pheasant shoot.

According to a report in the Sun, the royal dog fight happened during the Boxing Day shoot on Christmas Day at Sandringham, when Anne’s dog “sank its teeth” into the ear of a dog belonging to a gamekeeper, resulting in “a lot of blood and screaming.”

The Sun’s source said: “The Boxing Day shoot’s a huge family affair so Anne took along her dog. It ran across the field straight at the gamekeeper’s dog and latched on to its ear.”

Anne famously eschewed her mother’s preferred breed, corgis, in favor of bull terriers, which were originally bred for bull baiting and have a powerful bite. The princess, at the time of her first acquisition, declared: “This will give the palace corgis a run for their money.”

The latest episode appears to have been prolonged and traumatic. The source told the Sun: “It took a while to get the dog off the ear because it had really sunk its teeth in. Everyone was OK in the end but the atmosphere was extremely tense afterwards for some time. A good few people questioned what if it had been Charlotte or George or any of the children instead of another dog?”

Anne has form when it comes to her dogs running wild: she was the first royal to be convicted in court (under the dangerous dogs act) when she admitted in 2001 that her bull terrier Dotty bit two children while off the leash in Windsor Great Park. The older child, aged 12, was bitten on the collar bone and twice on the leg, while his 7-year-old brother was scratched on the arm and bitten on the leg. Both went to hospital but did not need stitches. She was fined £500 and a judge warned the dog would be destroyed if it reoffended.

A year later another of Anne’s terriers, called Florence, attacked one of the Queen’s corgis at Christmas. The corgi had to be put down.

Norfolk Police and the RSPCA have received no reports or complaints about the latest alleged dog incident, the Sun reported.

[From The Daily Beast]

Dogs are dogs and I’m of the opinion that sometimes, there are just dogs who shouldn’t be around other people and dogs who shouldn’t be put in excitable situations. Like, it’s a very modern thing to believe that your dog is supposed to be perfectly behaved all the time around everyone, just like it’s a modern thing to believe that your dogs should be welcome everywhere, around everyone. Anne should have learned her lesson years ago, decades ago, when her f–king dog attacked two children: leave the dogs at home. She owns a huge property, Gatcombe, where her dogs can play and be badly behaved and ill-tempered all they want.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images, Backgrid.

One of the things I loved about Prince Harry’s Spare is that he showed, repeatedly, that he didn’t give a f–k about the trappings of the monarchy. He was neglected and abused and brought up to believe that he was merely backup, so he was never in awe of the pageantry of the monarchy. He saw the other side of it, the micro-rooms, the shabby patched sheets, the lack of care for historic buildings. In Spare, he also showed that he really doesn’t know the history of his own family or the history of the monarchy. So… it’s funny that anyone would think that Prince Harry would be a good coronation commentator. Sure, he could probably sit down and do the research, but he’s not a historian. That’s not the way his mind works. Still, the Express is convinced that Harry has been “offered” special guest commentary positions at two American networks:

It is understood the monarch, 74, is keen for his younger son Harry to be on the guest list, but it is still not clear whether this will be possible. But two major US TV networks are said to be trying to lure Harry away with a mega-bucks deal to host their coverage of the event. They are preparing multi-million dollar offers for him to join their commentary teams if he decides not to attend the Coronation, according to highly placed studio sources.

The three days of events being planned for Saturday May 6 to Monday May 8 will be on a par with the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee weekend last June. Charles and Camilla will be crowned King and Queen Consort during a service at Westminster Abbey on the Saturday morning, followed by a procession to Buckingham Palace where they will appear on the balcony with family members.

If the Duke of Sussex takes the TV role it is tipped to be a guaranteed “ratings blockbuster” and “one of the biggest royal coups of all time”. CBS and NBC are expected to lead the chase to persuade him to join their live coverage teams. CBS – the network that aired his and Meghan’s infamous interview with Oprah – is in pole position. NBC interviewed Harry two weeks ago before his memoir Spare was published in a headline-grabbing edition of its flagship show 60 Minutes.

The insider told this newspaper: “Network bosses are hoping he doesn’t go – and are ready to pay a hefty, seven-figure sum to land one of the biggest royal coups of all time. One very senior executive told me it would be worth US $5million for the bragging rights alone.

“Watching a new King being crowned while his son is on the couch talking viewers through it would be ratings dynamite – even if Harry steers completely clear of controversy and the rift that exists between them.”

Our source added: “There is now a massive appetite in America for Britain’s Royal Family, with enormous audiences for recent coverage of the deaths and funerals of Prince Philip and the Queen, as well as her Platinum Jubilee celebrations. Whichever network manages to land Harry will be guaranteed a ratings blockbuster, with an advance advertising blitz that will draw millions more viewers who might otherwise have tuned-in elsewhere.”

[From The Daily Express]

The background for this is QEII’s coronation, when her Uncle David (aka King Edward VIII/the Duke of Windsor) was banned from the coronation so he picked up a paid commentary position with one of the overseas networks. The thing is, David actually knew a lot about the history of the monarchy and he could actually explain the background on all of the ceremonies, etc. What would Harry do as a commentator? Say sh-t like “yeah, that’s my father, we haven’t spoken in nine months, he was horrible to my wife?” It doesn’t make any sense. Now, I believe that there are probably various networks pitching this idea and offering money. But if Harry doesn’t go to the coronation, I suspect he’ll just stay home and throw a birthday party for Archie. This is more about the monarchy trying to make Harry sound like the Duke of Windsor, because they have zero historical precedent for what Harry is doing with his life now.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.

Lord, I am so tired of Prince Andrew’s neverending melodrama. Can you even imagine being this useless yet so convinced of your importance? For years, everyone has made it perfectly clear: dude, no one wants you around, please go away. Andrew remains convinced that he can launch some kind of comeback, that he can be useful, that he will never go away because he’s needed and wanted. So, here’s one of the latest bizarre f–king stories about Andrew and his dumb “His Royal Highness” status. He supposedly stopped using his HRH in 2019 and then again in 2022 (because these people are idiots) and guess what? QEII gave him permission to keep using it anyway:

The late Queen gave the Duke of York her blessing to use his HRH title, The Telegraph understands. Prince Andrew was permitted to use the title “in a private capacity” after it was announced that his military titles and royal patronages would be returned to the monarch at the height of the Jeffrey Epstein scandal. He is now said to be determined to resurrect the privilege after the King allowed him to start pursuing certain business interests.

The Duke remains contrite about his perceived misdemeanours and has long considered himself hard done by for being effectively sacked as a working royal, despite having not been found guilty of any crime. Throughout the Epstein scandal and ensuing civil court case, when he stood accused of raping and sexually abusing a teenager on three separate occasions, the late Queen proved one of her youngest son’s most loyal and unwavering supporters.

The Duke is said to have asked her if he could use his HRH title and after many tete-a-tetes at Windsor Castle, she conceded.

“She was always in his corner and he had her ear, of that there was never any doubt,” a source said. “He was not stripped of the title and was still able to use it privately. He talked her around and she agreed.”

The prospect was not welcomed by palace aides, aware that any use of the title would raise eyebrows, not least after the Duke had paid millions to settle the case out of court and was meant to be keeping a low profile. A tentative plan to test the waters in public was thwarted, however, and the Duke was never afforded the opportunity to use the title before his mother died last September.

King ‘highly unlikely’ to support move. While personally supportive of his errant younger brother, Charles is considered highly unlikely to support such a bold move, not least one that might indicate a return to the royal fold or risk jeopardising the reputation of the monarchy. The King is thought to have held talks with the Duke in recent weeks, aware that his ostracisation posed a problem that was going nowhere and that the 62-year-old Duke needed some purpose. He is said to have agreed to allow him to pursue some business interests, which would serve the dual purpose of keeping him occupied and allowing him to make some money.

[From The Telegraph]

So… basically, Andrew was never formally stripped of his HRH and QEII and King Charles gave him permission to use his royal status for private business ventures… I thought no one could ever use their HRH for business? It’s weird how all of these rules were different for the Sussexes! Anyway, beyond the unhinged hypocrisy, I don’t really give a sh-t. Andrew is a buffoon and his buffoonery perfectly encapsulates the stupidity of the entire royal system. Speaking of, Andrew also wants to “overturn” his settlement with Virginia Giuffre:

Prince Andrew is to launch a dramatic bid to overturn the multi-million-pound settlement he struck with the woman who accused him of sexual assault. The Duke of York has consulted lawyers in an attempt to get Virginia Roberts to retract her allegations and possibly secure an apology, The Mail on Sunday understands. He was inspired to act after Ms Roberts dropped her lawsuit against another man she accused of sexual assault, admitting that she ‘may have made a mistake’ in identifying him.

And sources suggest the King will not oppose any legal action Andrew might take to clear his name – even though Charles previously told his brother he would be permanently exiled from Royal life. Ms Roberts – who now goes by her married name Giuffre – claimed she was forced to have sex with the Prince when she was 17, having been trafficked by convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.

In the out-of-court settlement, Andrew accepted no blame, and continues to strenuously deny any wrongdoing. But the scandal damaged his reputation and made him an outcast from the Royal Family. He was stripped of his military titles and asked not to use his HRH title. However, those close to Andrew claim he always wanted to fight the allegations in court, and was ‘bounced’ into agreeing a deal by Palace forces who feared the negative publicity of the case would overshadow the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee.

‘Andrew felt as if he was in a pressure-cooker, as if he was given no option but to settle,’ a source said. ‘But he never wanted to settle and has always insisted he was innocent. He wants to see what legal routes might be available to him. This isn’t about the money. He wants a route back to some sort of normality after a deeply trying period. I can tell you with confidence that Prince Andrew’s team is now considering legal options.’

[From The Daily Mail]

The rest of the Mail’s piece quotes convicted human trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell at length about HER recollections of one of the children she trafficked to Jeffrey Epstein and his associates. So, that should tell you a lot about this entire situation. Virginia’s gag order reportedly expires next month, so it’s possible that two things are happening concurrently: Andrew goes to court to overturn the settlement he made to Virginia AND Virginia goes on another interview spree where she speaks in graphic terms about how Maxwell trafficked her to His Royal Highness Prince Andrew the Duke of York.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid and Cover Images.

When Prince Harry began his promotion for Spare, the British media promptly began crying about how he needs to shut up and go away, no one cares about him, no one will read his stupid memoir! Now that Harry has given all of those interviews and Spare is a raging success in the US, UK and around the world, the same British media began asking: where’s Meghan, why isn’t she at Harry’s side, doesn’t she support him, why can’t we see her, why is she out of sight and shutting up?? The memoir and the promotion has been too uncomfortable for too many people over there and they’re flat-out desperate to return to their biggest moneymaker: blaming Meghan for everything. Well, now the Telegraph is getting into the “where’s Meghan” game, and they bizarrely have “sources” talking about Meghan’s current state of mind and whether she supports her husband.

…Since Christmas, Prince Harry has been left to soak up the limelight alone. As he embarked on an unprecedented publicity blitz to promote his memoir, Spare, this month, Meghan has remained below the radar – and sent a clear message: This is Harry’s project, not mine.

As with anything to do with the Sussexes, there has been much sniping and speculation online about the Duchess’s perceived influence. The book has Meghan’s fingerprints all over it, some have claimed, her voice throughout is unmistakable, she is the puppetmaster pulling the strings. But in fact, such claims could not be further from the truth. While the Duchess has backed her husband to the hilt over this deeply personal outpouring, she was not quite the driving force behind the project that many have assumed.

Sources suggest that media-savvy Meghan was slightly more circumspect about the concept of a memoir and may have raised gentle concerns about whether it was the right move. No stranger to taking on her enemies, she is understood to have been more wary than the Duke about this particular project.

Prince Harry, burning with resentment towards his father, his brother and the press, was fuelled by a bitter determination to right the wrongs of his past, but his wife took a broader view. That said, once Harry had made up his mind and embarked on the two-year process with ghostwriter JR Moehringer, the Duchess is said to have offered her full support and is immensely proud of his achievements.

“Is this the way she would have approached things? Possibly not,” said one source. “But she will always back him and would never have got involved in promoting such a personal project. This was about his own life, his own journey and his own perspective.”

Throughout the many agonised television appearances, the Duchess has remained holed up at their Montecito home. One source close to the Sussexes noted that if she had been involved in any aspect of promoting the book, she would have been accused of trying to steal the limelight. Perhaps, some suggest, she feels she has nothing to gain.

While the Duke has reason to reconcile with his family, his own flesh and blood, the Duchess is not bound by such ties. She may back her husband in seeking peace with his family and with it, peace of mind, but for her, they represent a miserable chapter of a life now left far behind. As such, royal sources have indicated that they think it unlikely she will attend the King’s coronation at Westminster Abbey on May 6.

[From The Telegraph]

These people, I swear to God. “…Burning with resentment towards his father, his brother and the press, was fuelled by a bitter determination…” He literally wanted his side out there. Everyone has been lying about him for decades. He wanted to put his own story out there as a historical document in his own voice. He’s made that perfectly clear. “Sources suggest that media-savvy Meghan was slightly more circumspect about the concept of a memoir and may have raised gentle concerns about whether it was the right move” – so, the thing that kills me about Meghan is that she was actually perfect for the Windsors. She was discreet, she was perfectly willing to dedicate her life to public service, and most of all, she understood the power of silence and maintaining magic and mystery through not participating in Confessional Culture. That being said, I hope these “sources” are full of sh-t and Meghan has quietly been working on her own memoir, because I would totally read it.

Also: it’s perfectly clear that Harry wrote this memoir FOR Meghan. This was a love letter to Meghan, his defense of her, his shield to protect her, this was Harry saying in his own voice: this is why we left, these are the decisions I made, this is not on my wife, this has never been her fault at all.

Last thing: “royal sources” are trying to convince themselves that Meghan is done with that godforsaken island. I hope she is too, but y’all know that if Harry goes to his father’s coronation, the only way he’ll go is if Meghan goes with him.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images, Backgrid.