Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

The royal family

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Palace not publishing bullying review claims…

102 replies

DFOD · 30/06/2022 14:00

amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/jun/30/palace-not-publish-review-bullying-claims-meghan

What do we think is going on here?

  1. There something to hide - either against Palace or MM?
  2. There was nothing irregular against Palace or MM?
  3. Both parties need to leave sleeping dogs lie?
OP posts:
notanotheroneagain · 01/07/2022 22:07

So Charles is still bankrolling Harry? If so that is a disgrace.

What on earth are you talking about?
Charles does not give Harry a penny !

Were you all not complaining about the Netflix deal? Suddenly, you don't know that Harry even works for Silicon Valley on top of the deal?

FoggySpecs · 01/07/2022 22:12

I expect the Royal Family are saving the details of the report for a rainy day, if she and Harry make more sensational allegations I bet they will be leaked as a sort of tit for tat. I think they are all generally fairly petty, only the queen rises above it all

Cloudysunday · 01/07/2022 22:29

@notanotheroneagain neither you nor I know if C is giving H any money .

tigger2022 · 01/07/2022 22:37

I have a suspicion that the palace wants it all to go away because as the institution they would be financially liable if Meghan constructively dismissed anyone. I doubt they want any more court cases or tribunals or publicity about how it is behind the scenes.

DFOD · 01/07/2022 22:55

notanotheroneagain · 01/07/2022 18:28

My statement was to those who say MM has been quiet about the accusations. She has not.

She was not 'exonerated' because she was not 'investigated'. They say they were investigating the processes - which begs the question that why did they not do this process investigation when Anne, Philippe, Charles, William and Andrew were accused of bullying. Why specifically MM, what is it about her, that makes them want to investigate.

MM does not have to say anything now, because she has not been investigated, charged or exonerated of anything. Off the record, she has denied any wrong doing and that's enough.

The press will not let it go, because there are a few fun facts that the public has to be blinded to :


  • H&M left the RF 2yrs ago. It's been a pandemic and hard all round. Despite the minus of these 2 seniors royals (with MM accused of spending too much during all her time there), yet there has been no decrease in the spend, just an increase.

  • The lump sum that gets assigned to PC's two sons remains the same for the last 5yrs despite the fact that H&M left 2yrs ago. The 4M has always been reported as if 2M for W&K and another 2M for H&M. Technically, that means, there should be 2M less assigned to the PC children's assigned amount.

  • H&M paid in their 2.4M to renovate Frogmore as well as rent money on top.

Those points are just what involves H&M. Never mind the several trips, chopper flights under 15K, security etc. that are not declared in the report.

So yes, the press won't let this diversion go, incase the plebs look too closely at the finances.

“Off the record, she has denied any wrong doing and that's enough.”

@notanotheroneagain - is it?

Enough for who? Any victims? The general public? or just you?

OP posts:
FootontheHeartbreak · 02/07/2022 06:34

I suspect most bullying bosses would deny any wrongdoing. In general they think their behaviour is warranted or don’t care how it impacts others anyway.

PreparationPreparationPrep · 02/07/2022 08:10

They've already acknowledged this a while back and advertised for staff accordingly.

It will be interesting to see the outcome of their advertising . I wonder if it's like most organisations with a disproportionate number of black snd brown at the bottom, low paid roles and disproportionate number of white at senior and management role better paid. Then they manipulate their stats to look like their work force is diverse without looking at the salaries in the same report.

accordionhater · 02/07/2022 08:17

These discussions are pointless because the Kate fans would foam at the mouth in defence of Kate if she was accused of bullying and the Meghan fans would never accept the palace not publishing the report as a sign she hadn't done anything. Kate v Megan fans are just the spiderman pointing meme over and over again, except maybe Meghan's fans are a little more self righteous than Kates, who are largely just huns.

DFOD · 02/07/2022 08:32

accordionhater · 02/07/2022 08:17

These discussions are pointless because the Kate fans would foam at the mouth in defence of Kate if she was accused of bullying and the Meghan fans would never accept the palace not publishing the report as a sign she hadn't done anything. Kate v Megan fans are just the spiderman pointing meme over and over again, except maybe Meghan's fans are a little more self righteous than Kates, who are largely just huns.

Yes these “debates” always seem to be fractious and polarise quickly with people having their “opinion” already made on every or any issue that comes along.

Very defensive and rigid thinking never helps to advance discussion as everyone takes their already assigned positions rapidly and then just double down aggressively.

OP posts:
Samcro · 02/07/2022 08:49

how can you "debate" something that hasn't happened? the report has not be made public. so there is no proof that M was or was not a bully.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 02/07/2022 08:56

How can you "debate" something that hasn't happened? the report has not be made public. so there is no proof that M was or was not a bully

Well said, Samcro

notanotheroneagain · 02/07/2022 09:05

Cloudysunday · 01/07/2022 22:29

@notanotheroneagain neither you nor I know if C is giving H any money .

Clarence House tried to make a confusion about when PC last gave H money last time they announced the report. I would say they would shout it from the roof tops if PC was giving H money. So he is not.

notanotheroneagain · 02/07/2022 09:06

tigger2022 · 01/07/2022 22:37

I have a suspicion that the palace wants it all to go away because as the institution they would be financially liable if Meghan constructively dismissed anyone. I doubt they want any more court cases or tribunals or publicity about how it is behind the scenes.

I highly doubt money is the issue, considering that they paid millions for Andrew.

CathyorClaire · 02/07/2022 09:09

*Huh ?

They paid it back*

There was no 'rent money on top'.

The much trumpeted £2.4m repayment suddenly included it.

notanotheroneagain · 02/07/2022 09:09

Enough for who? Any victims? The general public? or just you?

Therein lies the problem...........there are no victims. MM has not been investigated because other than JK gossiping, there has been no charges against her. Unlike PA, there has never even been a victim who is threatening and coming out as a victim or wanting to take her to court or anything. Nothing, we are discussing air, tbh.

notanotheroneagain · 02/07/2022 09:12

CathyorClaire · 02/07/2022 09:09

*Huh ?

They paid it back*

There was no 'rent money on top'.

The much trumpeted £2.4m repayment suddenly included it.

What do you mean 'suddenly' included? Because it was paid back. Didn't people complain about it. What is the problem here or what are you trying to twist exactly? They paid back thee money, end of that. They are the only ones who paid back any renovations that I ever heard of.

notanotheroneagain · 02/07/2022 09:14

except maybe Meghan's fans are a little more self righteous than Kates, who are largely just huns.

Maybe if your sentence had ended before this little dig, I would have believed you to be neutral.
You own post sounds 'self righteous' tbh.

Cloudysunday · 02/07/2022 09:22

notanotheroneagain ·
Cloudysunday
@notanotheroneagain neither you nor I know if C is giving H any money .
Clarence House tried to make a confusion about when PC last gave H money last time they announced the report. I would say they would shout it from the roof tops if PC was giving H money. So he is not.

My word you are very definite in some of your answers ! The FACT is that none of us know if PC is privately helping to fund H and M . Lots of parents ( including me) help their adult DC.
It’s reasonable to SPECULATE if PC is assisting privately , after all they have a hugely expensive lifestyle and the Netflix/Spotify deals are unlikely to be repeated if there is nothing produced . So far we have one cringe inducing festive podcast and the promise of more but no dates for anything else . A bit like H’s memoirs or M’s next book .

DFOD · 02/07/2022 09:23

The problem with the tedious double downers is that by their doubling down and inability to engage in nuanced debate they just alienate their point and are inadvertently counterproductive towards their causes. They don’t take people with them to support their cause.

OP posts:
CathyorClaire · 02/07/2022 09:31

They paid back thee money, end of that

If you read back your own posts you'll find you stated they made the repayment (not disputed) and rent money on top'

They did not pay rent on top. In the usual royal spin it transpired it was rolled up in the 'repayment'.

It's quite easy to follow.

emptysky · 02/07/2022 09:39

This reply has been withdrawn

This message has been withdrawn at the poster's request

Samcro · 02/07/2022 09:41

DFOD · 02/07/2022 09:23

The problem with the tedious double downers is that by their doubling down and inability to engage in nuanced debate they just alienate their point and are inadvertently counterproductive towards their causes. They don’t take people with them to support their cause.

what? can you explain that as I don't get it.

Cloudysunday · 02/07/2022 10:21

@emptysky

I admire Catherine but I can assure you I am anything but a “ surrendered wife” . What a strange thing to say .

cannibalvalley · 02/07/2022 11:14

I think if Charles was giving harry money that would be made public. So I don't think he is.

Cloudysunday · 02/07/2022 11:20

Even from personal funds ? You really think that would be published?