Meghan Markle signs with Hollywood talent agency WME

[DottyLS]

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/meghan-markle-signs-wme-1235405157/

According to Twitter this is a real step up

@skullbabe you can image search that silly fake document and it’s only seen on Reddit and the nutty website I mention. The letter is fake, 100%. It isn’t even addressed right, Archewell Inc is clearly not a ‘not for profit’, it should have said archewell foundation ( I’m sure a revised version will pop up soon enough ) and the date is earlier than registration. The codes you mention are for not for profits and there’s a long list of types of orgs that can use that code. The reason there’s a hunch of loons on Reddit absolutely hell bent on insisting this is they’re absolutely determined to paint them as people who use public money to ‘make themselves look good’. It’s pathetic. They follow all the rules to form a foundation to assist actual charities. Why anyone has a problem with it is bizarre.

@skullbabe oh I don’t count twitter as a document source, everything gets shared there. It originated on Reddit. Did they steal mail?!?! Honestly, they’re a bunch of idiots.

The success of the Heritage Foundation suit notwithstanding, the sense of schadenfreude some posters have at the thought of Harry potential deportation is quite interesting.

Isn’t it just. Do you remember on the Netflix series when Tyler Perry said that he, as a son of an abused woman, recognised abusive behaviour when the institution was trying to force them to come back by taking away their security? Exerting financial control, like so many abusers do. It’s similar. We don’t want you, get out, stay out, shut up, don’t go anywhere, we hate you, stay away… but also we’re going to go to weird and extreme lengths to try and make sure you have to come back to us so we can continue to torment and abuse you here. Where we can see you.

It’s disturbed.

That's quite a jump to say I want him deported but it's interesting from a legal point of view especially the missing file. I was really wanting anyone with any legal knowledge for their view on it.

I will say though that the action does also have the potential benefit of him actually being held accountable for something if he has lied. So far he has been able to do and say whatever he wants and get away with it just because 'I'm royal don't you know and my adoring fans will excuse me of anything and everything'. It's pretty embarrassing all round.

Just a point about the missing file - do you think a private organisation should be able to demand the information from a public agency about a private individual? Are the immigration documents of any other figure public or otherwise publicly available?

The ultimate and logical outcome of a successful challenge would be deportation. If you think that this is a proportionate response to him lying about drug use - that’s fair enough. I do not but I am not the US government. If it is successful he will have to return here because he won’t be allowed to settle anywhere else. That seems contrary to what many posters want.

Just a point about the missing file - do you think a private organisation should be able to demand the information from a public agency about a private individual? Are the immigration documents of any other figure public or otherwise publicly available?

If they have a legal case and it's deemed to be in the public interest then yes I do.

He is not going to get deported.

Now you’re just getting carried away (like Tyler Perry)

They left the family business which was their own choice and they lost the job perks that go with the job (including security

They were both adults both nearly forties, with millions of independent wealth which they could access

Yes skullbabe, I agree.

They left the family business which was their own choice and they lost the job perks that go with the job (including security

Security isn’t a perk of the job. He was put in danger because of the family he was born into and the public interest in them. That is lifelong. Andrew has security.

So you're saying that the British public should have been forced to pay for the Sussexes security even if they weren't working royals anymore and living as private citizens in the USA?

And no, it’s not abuse when Charles refused to continue financially supporting his 38 year old son and his family when they chose to leave to make money for themselves.

Also no, despite Harry’s tantrums, it's not up to the royal family to decide who gets to have security.

Furthermore I'm shocked, completely shocked, that some people here consider it wrong and an invasion of Harry’s privacy when an organisation is trying to find out whether Harry was given special treatment as a prince when it came to his immigration status.

Shouldn't this be a matter of public interest since there might have been some sort of secret deal between Harry and the US immigration officials? That he was given special exemptions based on his status as a prince?

I mean, some of the same people here were outraged that William accepted a cash settlement from his phone hacking case, because as a prince he apparently wasn't entitled to privacy and it’s wrong for him to be given special treatment based on his status. 🙄

I agree with @MamoruHisaishi ·Also, the cost of giving Harry and his family security in the UK where they would have been living in the grounds of a Royal palace where the security was all in place compared to in the US where their security would have to be flown out, be compensated for living abroad and be in a completely different environment where gun ownership is legal, is enormous. Why should the UK taxpayer pay for security for non working Royals who have chosen to move somewhere where their security cost would have vastly increased?

And no, it’s not abuse when Charles refused to continue financially supporting

That’s his role. It’s fucked up, but it’s how the institution works. It’s the deal. H didn’t get to properly train and pursue his own choice of career… because of who his father is. So yes, his father as heir then, should continue paying the security as he does for Andrew. Security is based on risk and as a former security for them said, their risk was as high as the Queen’s.

Furthermore I'm shocked, completely shocked, that some people here consider it wrong and an invasion of Harry’s privacy when an organisation is trying to find out whether Harry was given special treatment as a prince when it came to his immigration status.

Visa applications are private. That’s why. He should be treated like anyone else. The ‘organisation’ is a right wing American group and the person doing this is a telegraph journalist who was a former aide to Thatcher. It’s weird and strange that people like you want to continue to persecute and ruin their lives. You don’t want them here, you don’t want them there. You don’t want them to be safe. What is it that you want for them? To not exist? There’s a lot of others in that camp, hence his need for security.

I mean, some of the same people here were outraged that William accepted a cash settlement from his phone hacking case, because as a prince he apparently wasn't entitled to privacy and it’s wrong for him to be given special treatment based on his status

No, you’re twisting things again. Nobody on these boards said William wasn’t entitled to privacy at all. You’re lying. What people said was, he received a settlement but kept it quiet and the future king should disclose any settlement from Murdoch. Not the private information. William has sued media before and he made it public he was hacked by NOTW.

Shouldn't this be a matter of public interest since there might have been some sort of secret deal between Harry and the US immigration officials? That he was given special exemptions based on his status as a prince?

https://www.uscis.gov/records/request-records-through-the-freedom-of-information-act-or-privacy-act

Yes it can be of public interest but releasing this information has no precedent for living people in the US. The US government would need to change procedure which if there is enough interest the US population will petition them to do.

No, I haven't gone to reddit. Archewells tax return (990 form) is on Archewells site. Half way down the page. It clearly says it's a public charity.

https://archewell.com/foundation/

Edward & Wallis received a very generous sum every year after he abdicated.

Yes you have. The fake letter you posted is from there.

I mean, some of the same people here were outraged that William accepted a cash settlement from his phone hacking case, because as a prince he apparently wasn't entitled to privacy and it’s wrong for him to be given special treatment based on his status.

Some people were but many other people were horrified at how the media seems to have such power in this country that members of the royal family have to enter into such agreements to protect themselves and how we are observing in real time how different people navigate the effects and impact of the media. I for one felt terrible for William.

@Nightlystroll take your derail to where it belongs https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/the_royal_family/4779046-archewell-only-had-two-donors

we have discussed it to death, enough!

I'm thinking your last comment refers to me?

Archewells own tax return that is published on its own site says it's a public charity. But I guess you're so wedded to the idea that it's a private foundation that you don't believe Harry and Meghan. I don't know why you think they'd lie about it.

What about the Obama Foundation and the Gates Foundation - they file their 990 forms similarly? Are they charities too? What government funding do Archewell, the Obama and the Gates Foundations receive? What direct public contributions have Archewell received? Do you know how to donate directly to Archewell as a member of the public? How about the charities that list themselves as charities - what government funding do they receive?

However it's set up and however it intends to raise money, it's clear it's registered as a public charity and not a private foundation.

I really don't care whether it's a public charity or a private foundation. I'm very glad the pair of them are doing something worthwhile. We need more of that in the world. But I don't understand why people keep making out the return is a fake and keep insisting it's a private foundation. It's clearly not.

Archewell is a tax-exempt private foundation that is structured as a charitable trust. But you’re right - it doesn’t really matter in the greater scheme of things.

No the return isn’t fake. The letter though almost certainly is.

i do remember one of the Obama foundation’s original aims was to build a presidental library so was accepting donations to do.