The Times

[Rushingfool]

Anyone else think The Times should not be printing extracts from this new book about Royal Courtiers at this time? Incredibly stupid given that H&M are trying to mend fences? I feel really quite cross for everyone involved - William's efforts to build bridges etc, all going to be in vain now. Very naughty.

Who says they've 'never protected Meghan," apart from her and Harry!
Some might say they were very much protected, in that we had no idea quite how badly Harry, for instance, has behaved over the years and his friends took the flak for him.

if its verified that bullying was happening at the palace, I for one will be interested to find out why senior royals did nothing.

Realistically, what can they do if senior royal family members are the ones involved in it and aren’t interested in changing their behaviour? They can’t be managed out as you can do for an employee (or even a business owner) if necessary for continued poor behaviours.

What we can assume they did - individual family members told them that wasn’t how staff were treated, and then separated their households to try and isolate the staff who came with them. Other staff members just got hung out to dry - left to suffer and the eventually to leave. This is not remotely good enough on the Palace’s part, by the way. They owed each and every staff member a duty to care.

I said when this first came out last year, closely followed by the Oprah interview, that it was extraordinary that Meghan claimed the Palace hadn’t protected her when they had hushed up a massive scandal, and hung their own staff out to dry, to protect her. I got massive abuse for saying this, but I still think it’s true.

If it means too much will be exposed the RF are not subject to that

Yes, it might mean dredging up the 12 official complaints of that behaviour by Andrew.
And years ago Charles, and him pulling that washbasin off the wall and grabbing someone by the throat or whatever he did.

None of them are perfect, including Meghan. However, she's the only one who gets book after book written about her in a money making exercise.

so what it the point of the book/thread?

In response to the question about UN Women, Robert Lacey addressed this in a book published last year.

Mr Lacey wrote: “[Meghan] had rubbed shoulders with the likes of Hillary Clinton… and might have hoped to join UN Women’s distinguished roster of goodwill ambassadors that included celebrities such as Nicole Kidman and Emma Watson… but in those pre-Harry days UN Women only assigned the cable actress the lesser role of advocate.”
He quoted a Hollywood screenwriter with a connection to the Duchess, who said: “Meghan does not cope well with rejection.
“She’s nice and smiley as can be until you step in her way or don’t give her what she hopes for. She can be remorseless ‒ heaven help you!”
According to a source, she said she would only visit the market if there was no branding for UN Women and that she “snapped” after seeing posters and T-shirts advertising the UN.

www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1456677/meghan-markle-un-women-duchess-sussex-fiji-market-royal-family-spt

However, she's the only one who gets book after book written about her in a money making exercise.

There’s nearly 700 books on Diana under “Historical Biography” on Amazon, Roussette! More than 1000 on the Queen.

Meghan might be a publishing gold mine for authors right now, but this is absolutely not uncommon.

They are hardly character assassinations are they? I haven't seen that about the Queen, have you?

Not all the books about Neghan are character assassinations you know. You haven’t read many of them by choice, I thought?

*Meghan! That wasn’t a Freudian slip! 😂

The UN story makes zero sense.

Especially when she actually met them in NY recently. And has always been proud of that association.

The market story went from her having morning sickness to the security detail getting nervous.

This book smacks of TB book of lies.

Also disingenuous of VL to not distinguish between BP, KP and SR.

The major problem was with KP staff as well as a few seniors at BP (mainly JK from the sounds of it). SR staff were deployed to Archewell, Travelyst and other projects. None of the Suits, previous charities ever complained about MM, including wardrobe staff, volunteer kitchens and other charities, nor SR staff. On the contrary, they are all full of praises. and that includes the school teachers and other students.

If what is written in both this book and TB's book is incorrect then she will have her lawyers all over it surely? I know I would.

Don't have to, it's all a collection of old stories - maybe just a bit amplified.

All not denied by the palace at the time, so are left to stay - that is where they got H&M. If the palace was asked at the time, and did not deny anything, then it goes to print and there is nothing they can do about it. Hence they created Sussex Royal. From then on falsehoods were denied, and leaks stopped (well, except for info that was shared among the other houses, that is).

I was one of those people that denied for a long time that the rest of the family we're working against the Sussexes. Thought it was all media messing about. But it soon became apparent that the stories were twisted and coming from within.

Then came the budget flights fiasco, the exit leak from DW, KP allowing JK to testify against MM and reopen a case with irrelevant info, Camilla employing MM tormentors, Angela Levin as well DM editor and all sorts in-between. I couldn't believe the obvious way they are doing it, how blatant it all is.

They are used to getting away with all of it. But without HMQ, will the public have as much patience and faith when the RF acts like this. Charles and Camilla are not exactly the virtuous pair nor have they as much allegiance as everyone did with the queen.

The ones I know about are. The ones that have excerpts splattered all over media, MN, Twitter etc.

Rousette I think you’ve forgotten Omid Scobie’s book with a second on the way🤣

I don’t think that was critical in any way, certainly not critically acclaimed

One book that's positive. Sean Smith, but posters on these threads wouldn't want to hear about it.

"Meghan Misunderstood is a pioneering book that sets the record straight on the most talked about, unfairly vilified and misrepresented woman in the world."

That doesn't even make sense.

If she wanted to be 'promoted' to UN goodwill ambassador or to be regarded as on similar level, she would know to smile and mingle with UN Women personnel / volunteers. The story about 'whispering' and leaving in a bit of a huff doesn't really hang together tbh. She'd have to be stupid to behave like that in front of cameras, and she's not stupid. Flawed, yes. But not thick.

That's why I'm intrigued about the earrings and the 'on loan from Chopard' false story. When did Meghan know that was being touted - and then what happened? I mean, I think it's unlikely she started that particular lie - so who did? And then what?

I think it's possible that an 'exacting boss' with a twatty husband who everyone came to dislike is being set up here on some things after the fact.

I may of course be wrong and naive. As pp says (Serenster, I think) there is a paper trail going back a couple of years that matches staff's recollections on various issues.

For clarity: yes I think the Yorks are much worse and would gladly see the demise of the monarchy as it currently exists. The whole 'palaces' set-up is a shit show.

Finding Freedom had a LOT of publicity

Reminds me of those Royal Experts who were caught lying about seeing the Oprah interview before it aired - Dicky and Victoria Arbiter and the lot 😂😂😂😂😂

There is literally zero negative review from all those who actually know her. Nothing at all.

Well, that's not true, according to Tom Bower. He cites an ad campaign for a Canadian clothing store where there was a lot of anti-feeling about her.

"For clarity: yes I think the Yorks are much worse and would gladly see the demise of the monarchy as it currently exists. The whole 'palaces' set-up is a shit show."

I agree with some of this! Although I do like Beatrice and Eugenie. Their parents may have been involved in scandals like allegedly PC and QE - but they both seem like nice girls.

What scandal was the Queen involved in?

How about Queen Elizabeth ‘we don’t talk to people like that in this family’ after Meghan berated some other soul about so called egg in a vegan dish