More Of Meghan’s Archwell podcasts…

[susan12345678]

Just to continue the discussion

Maybe she's the Queen and doesn't actually need one

Wasn't it the same trip that Harry said some days he felt almost too miserable to get out of bed? Again, insulting to his context and poorly representing the Queen.

The point being I don’t class that date as my marriage date - I consider my marriage the date of my wedding and also state it as such - and knowing the circumstances I described you wouldn’t state that I was lying would you?

Meghan can be tone deaf - for people who don’t see her charitably, her taking about having something just for her and Harry away from the crowds comes across as “ungrateful “, but for others….we get it, they wanted something personal, away from the behemoth of the spectacle of the grand royal wedding. What a sweet thing they did and also understandable. However as I’ve said before, Meghan doesn’t get that people are set to view her as a villain, and even something that she views as sweet and a tender personal moment can and has been taken as an attack. She needs to learn.

People on here making derisions and labels on MM purely on feeling. 'I don't trust her, I saw how she looked/ communicated/ she is a liar etc. All based on feelings

no, based on fact.
the “private” wedding the Archbishop of Canterbury never performed. A lie from MM

the SA performer who never said people danced in the streets for MM, just like they did for NM. Another lie.

she lies.
You can’t pretend this is about feelings.
people don’t trust liars because they have a track record of being untrustworthy.

You can say it 100 times. Meghan is not a 'proven liar'

yes, you can say “she is not a proven liar” as many times as you want.
that does not make it true.

we all know she lies - it’s been proven beyond any doubt.

Got it - Henry is not allowed to suffer from mental health issues because his grandmother has been beholden to duty above everything including very real mental health issues her children and some of her grandchildren are going.

what lies allow for you to treat Meghan as a someone who does not struggle with very human emotions?

i don’t “treat” her as anything, as I have nothing to do with her.

her lies mean that I do not trust her. Because she lies. That’s pretty straightforward.

why do you assume she “struggles with very human emotions” and I do not? Is that not common to all humankind? Why treat MM as different to anyone else?

MM is not a liar. The British press are. Twisting everything she says. People are not that stupid.
Tell you what, why don't the BM just go to criminal courts and they can find lots of murderers, peados etc to talk about.

The Cut article was the US press. The leaked photos of Archie - US press. The drone above the house - US press. The podcast - US companies. For someone who supports MM, you seem curiously uninformed. You also spend more time creating strawmen than a farmer.

But she did have a ceremony before she got married at the cathedral - was it a marriage no but both she and Harry viewed themselves as married from that moment. Why view this uncharitably?

I am of the same culture as Lebo the composer and I can indeed tell you that hyperbole is certainly part of the discourse especially in situations of a meet and greet and I believe that he did say this. I don’t think Meghan lied.

What I do think is that she didn’t do herself any favours by repeating what he said - because he obviously can’t admit that he over egged the pudding and she also looks ridiculous.

What other lies?

MM is not a liar

is that you, Meghan?

its been proven, many times.
you can try to twist things and make up excuses, but the thing is - it’s stupid to lie when you are in the public eye because, sooner or later, you invariably get found out.

MM was sussed a long time ago, but she keeps digging herself further down her mine shaft of fabrication.

“The Duchess of Sussex has apologised to a court for making a misleading statement in her privacy case against the Mail on Sunday's publishers.
The Appeal Court heard she had asked an aide to pass on information to the authors of a biography - despite having earlier said she "did not contribute".
Meghan said she had forgotten the events and had not intended to mislead.”

I call “a misleading statement” in a British court… a lie. She lies. And she lies to court. Not just in interviews.

William and Harry's money from Diana came from her divorce settlement. She may have been the daughter of an Earl, but her father's money was in the Althorp estate which was inherited by her brother. Before Althorp was opened to the public 40+ years ago, her father and stepmother sold many of its paintings to afford its huge upkeep.
It was Diana's sister, Sarah, who went out with Charles, not Jane.

I always have to ask. What are you gaining from tarnishing MM? Labelling her as a liar/narc/attention seeker etc. What are you trying to achieve?

She is not funded by the taxpayer, the general public are re-directed to specific charities to make payments ...............H&M raise funds by polo and other means.

What do you want, what is your end goal, what are you thinking you are helping society (the collective ) here?

What I do think is that she didn’t do herself any favours by repeating what he said - because he obviously can’t admit that he over egged the pudding and she also looks ridiculous

she made it up.

he was diplomatic and said he could not remember saying that. Which is fair enough, it was three years ago. But on tape he is heard saying “'It’s an honour to meet you. Everyone in South Africa’s heard of Meghan Markle’”

nothing about Mandela.
Not one single word.
not surprising, because who would ever compare MM to Mandela?

she looks ridiculous because it was a ridiculous thing to lie about. And it was a stupid thing to lie about cos it was all caught on film.

But you do treat her very differently to how you would treat others and yourself.

A relatively new mum in a new role was asked about her mental health and her husband in the context of his concerns about his mothers’s documented issues with the press and she said she wasn’t doing ok.

You believe that whatever lies you believe she has told negates her emotions of being overwhelmed. As a terrible human she has no real emotion except to promote herself, no reason to be struggling because she is wealthy and was in the royal family and even if she really was feeling all of those things she really needed to be quiet about them because nobody cares.

This is why I state you don’t consider her feelings and motivations as normal and human as yours might be - you feel that her motivations are always questionable.

I always have to ask. What are you gaining from tarnishing MM?

I always have to ask: what do you to gain by denying lies that are acknowledged as such and are in the public domain?

one cannot tarnish a reputation that is irredeemably muddied

Yes I agree - misleading statement is most likely a lie

1 lie

Next?

And I believe he said it because as I said - I come from that culture

I also understand why he would not want people to know he said such a thing - look at the Mandela family reaction

so no - not a lie

Actually he went out with both of them, the family thought Jane more suitable but she said no. Sarah was never going to be realistic for various reasons . Also Diana had her own family money as well as her divorce settlement .

This is why I state you don’t consider her feelings and motivations as normal and human as yours might be - you feel that her motivations are always questionable

people tend not to trust liars.

that’s a very human thing. We learn to be wary of those who are repeatedly proven to be untruthful.

So far we have only one confirmed lie……

So far she has lied once……

What other lies mean that she doesn’t get to be treated as a real human being?

I present to you the Guardian: www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/sep/03/do-not-pretend-celebrity-princess-meghan-markle-can-meaningfully-advance-the-cause-of-racial-justice

one cannot tarnish a reputation that is irredeemably muddied

I'm guessing that his the whole point - to make tarnish her reputation. But to what end?

If she was some kind of Weinstein/ Maxwell/ Epstein character, I would get all the outrage, but for now, I'm not convinced at all.