The Palace seems to be Leaking like a Sieve

[Meanderings]

These people are apparently worried about what Harry will write in his memoir but we've somehow managed to get a play by play of what has gone on this week.

From blocking Meghan's visit to Balmoral to how the joint greeting of well wishers came about.

Please note that these writers are making it clear they are speaking to Palace sources.

Now when H&M start speaking (in defense of themselves), people will complain.

Prince William and Harry’s reconciliation is just for mourning, not for life

Bombshell text from William to Harry that sparked an unexpected show of family unity after the pair failed to meet at Balmoral in the hours after Queen's death, writes RICHARD KAY

Bollocks! Misreporting anything said in a court of law is,a serious offence and even every rookie journalist knows this

That's if the people writing these stories really are talking to palace sources. If they are and these news reports are true,
the Royal family probably feel the need to get their side of it in first before Harry and Meghan twist things to suit their hard done by little sob story. Again.

Um because M whined about it on oprah

Because let's face it, Meghan going to Balmoral would have been a disaster. She had no right to be there. None of the queen's grandchildren were there apart from William and Harry, and that is because they are the sons of the next monarch. And after all the stress she put the queen and the duke of Edinburgh through, it was blatant cheek and disrespect for her to assume she could go there in the first place. I highly doubt the queen would have wanted her there for her final hours. In fact, it was probably laid out years ago who the queen wanted by her wide when the time came.

@SilverLiningPlaybook

If Harry and Meghan were good liars, I'd agree. But they are atrocious at it. It seems like everyday they are being caught out with silly little fibs they have said in interviews being proven to be false. And it means that you cannot believe a thing that they say.

@Meanderings

They complained that Lillibet and Archie couldn't have prince and princess title despite the fact that royal protocol states that great grandchildren of a monarch cannot have these titles unless they are in direct line to the throne. So it is not impossible that they would kick off over HRH.

Meghan said that she wanted Archie to be a Prince as it would mean he would be safe from a security point of view. His title has no bearing on his security arrangements and she must have known this when she said it.

Well the latest article I have seen says that Harry and Meghan have been asking King Charles non stop about their children's titles. King Charles said he will confer Prince and Princess titles on Archie and Lilibet but is going to do a Letters Patent as they won't be HRH. Harry and Meghan apparently furious as they believe if their kids got HRH they would get UK paid security for their kids in US. That would save them a lot of money they spend on security but King Charles said no they can't have HRH style so no UK paid security for Sussexes in US. I hope Harry and Meghan are not pestering King Charles at the moment. His Mum has not even had her funeral yet. I think King Charles knows most people in UK won't tax payers money being spent on Sussexes overseas as they chose to go there.

do people really believe this suff??

Given H & M’s form for petulance, I absolutely believe it

Sadly yes.

H&M pestering Charles 🤣🙄😂

@SomethingNastyInTheBallPool But this entire thread is about the fact that people are getting their information from non-reputable papers. I broadly agree with you on the way it works for the "reputable" papers (and your view on The Times seems to match mine) but the Mail and Express and Sun etc are blatantly making shit up or speaking to random passers-by as their sources.

And even the "reputable" papers have an agenda. The Times has definitely been in the "we hate Meghan" camp, even publishing an off record conversation held under Chatham House Rules that had taken place a few month before to add grist to the mill when H&M were leaving.

Agree

Do you really believe that?
Honestly?

Truthfully, do you think any of that is true? Has Charles, H or M said any of this?
Has the Palace released any official notice that the children will not have HRH?
Has the Palace released any statement saying Charles will do a Letter's Patent?

If not, then this "article" is just made up bollocks. Its come from a deranged mind, full of fuckery. All they are doing is making money out of people who will believe this nonsense.

I could have sworn sunshine sachs dUmpEd them, pick a narrative.

See what I mean? people genuinely take these articles as fact. Very dangerous. I hope H&M activate their lawyers.

I actually hope they don't. I hope that they rise above it with grace and ignore all the s* swirling around

But even if they are reputable, they still have a bias. For example the Guardian obituary on the queen was cringeworthy in their obvious desire to diss the RF whilst seemingly being respectful.

The point being even if there has been a palace discussion about HRH titles and let's face it there's likely to have been even if it was lower ranked and not involving either Harry or Charles. A paper can legitimately take the 'source statement' and twist it up to be either mean Charles won't make them HRH or mean Harry badgering RF about his kids during this time. The source could be true, and past fact checking but the end story and headline could be - and likely is - completely biased.

@Sling they are being journalists. Not simply saying how marvellous and amazing she is.

It can be fun to spot the contradictions. Take who is the Queen's favourite GC, it's Harry (no reason given) it's Peter because he was first, it's Zara because she was the first GD, it's Eugenie because she called her granny in public! (don't quite understand that one) it's Louise because they have a lot of interests in common. Poor Beatrice and James don't seem to figure and according to one paper I read William was the least favourite because she has been training him since birth, I'd have thought that would make them close but hey I'm just a granny who loves all her GC.

What a load of codswallop and it's obviously made up. I doubt a woman as savvy as the Queen would ever tell anyone who her favourite was if she even had one.

the trouble is people put this made up stuff on here. people read it and then take it as fact(just like they do the tv show the crown)

I think H&M have been badly advised by SS.

People would have had a different perception I think, had they said royal life is not for us due to cultural differences & Meghan missing the US/Canada way of life. I think people would have been understood that. Not the Queen doesn’t own the word ‘royal’, that came across as petulant.

What people don’t understand is the OW interview. I think that was badly advised.

Her podcast with Serena ‘housing unit’ came across badly imo. Especially when viewed that the Queen did her duty 2 days before she died (mind you to make sure Johnson was gone imo!).

Maybe they need to change their PR company. Look at Camilla. She’s prime example as to positive/soft PR can change but it can take years. Hopefully with the family support it can be achieved.

Speaking from experience there is usually fault on both sides & forgiveness can take a while.

Oh gosh I forgot to add that I don’t believe most of the rubbish printed seeing what the papers did to a friend years ago. It was all lies twisted from the truth.

Also ancientgran you forgot Beatrice is the favourite because Granny lent her wedding dress to her!

She didn't say they misrepresented what was said in court.

People would have had a different perception I think, had they said royal life is not for us due to cultural differences & Meghan missing the US/Canada way of life.

this is funny because no, it wouldn't have changed anything. They never said they didn't want media coverage or that they wanted to be private citizens (eg the privacy thing was about saying they weren't happy with things like drones over their house watching their child). And yet... that is what the media claimed they said. So they could have said ANYTHING, and it still would have been taken wrong.

I mean the cultural stuff alone - you don't have to be a sociologist to understand that the way Meghan - as an American, an actress, with existing fame, a woman of colour, a woman well into her 30s etc - would approach things would be different. And yet... everyone seemed to think it was a complete surprise.