Meghan and Harry spotted out and about - ¡Viva Colombia! Edition (Part 7)

[skullbabe]

Welcome to Part 7 of our positive threads, where we explore all things Meghan and Harry. From the causes they champion and their business ventures to Meghan’s (and occasionally Harry’s 😉) fashion moments, there’s a lot to chat about. This is a drama-free space, so let’s keep it upbeat! High five to @queentim for the original inspiration.

I was very amused by a series of posts they have been making, attaching an email Meghan sent to her then Communications Director Jason Knauff while still a senior working Royal. It was one of the several emails that were made public in the course of Meghan’s court case against the Daily Mail.

The tweets claim that this was the “notorious 5am email” that the British papers had reported was a causing Meghan’s staff stress. Newsweek responded to the tweets by pointing out that this was not the case. But note there’s a portion of the email redacted. That’s not redacted in the original - it’s the section where Meghan mentioned her briefing Omid Scobie for Finding Freedom (the missing words are “discuss the Omid Scobie book (and their outreach)”).

Seems even the Sussex Squad now accept that that episode makes Meghan look bad…

https://www.newsweek.com/was-meghan-markle-accused-bullying-over-fears-moms-safety-1955544

She doesn’t write very well does she? Already got the victim complex and the persecution thing going too.

I don't know if it's you who posted this before, but why do certain posters keep going on about Piers Morgan wrt the alleged royal racists as if he was the original source? All he did was report what was in the Dutch version of Omid Scobie's book, Endgame, about an alleged exchange of letters between MM and KC - the only logical source for the contents thereof being MM or someone in her household.

He said he thinks the reporter (so only one) interviewed 12 people and that the interview with the senior source (unnamed) ‘suggests’ Meghan bullies people. Again, why would the reporter not put his/her name to it?

Again, nothing definite you could point to and say it happened. You can believe it happened of course, but it is not a proven fact at this time.

If Meghan is a bully then absolutely I could not defend that. But I do need verified proof.

The ‘Meghan stomping around in high heels barking orders’ sounds a tad misogynistic to me.

"The ‘Meghan stomping around in high heels barking orders’ sounds a tad misogynistic to me."

Would it have made a difference if she had had her favourite flats on?

I don’t ’keep going on’ about anything. Thanks.

Good user name though.

I don’t believe that you wouldn’t defend even verified truth. Some people and posters seem to put their heads in the sand like ostriches. You don’t want to believe it. I understand why you don’t. It’s because reporting such as this, makes your heroine/victim/adored one look more like a villain (or in this case, a dictator!) and you can’t have that with the narrative you all like to spin.

It’s a ridiculous reason to dismiss an article from a well regarded publication. There were around 12 sources who were spoken to. One a high ranking, current employee. Not to believe these ‘sources’ (let’s not forget that these are people that are being or have been affected) who are being brave to share their experiences, albeit anonymously is not ok. It’s excusing and minimising inexcusable behaviour. However, it’s completely expected from some. Like the knee jerk reaction of the Sussex camp releasing the statement of “it’s a disgruntled ex-employee”. No it’s not, it’s 11 of them and one that is currently employed.

There were two names attached to the article as editors, who knows, it could have also been them that reported on it to. After all, the majority of the article is formed from direct quotes from these sources and you can’t expect them to all be named and credited for the article.

I've edited plenty of books and if you put your name to a work - book or article - as editor, you assume responsibility for it (not least because you can collect royalties on it). The buck stops with you.

The mental gymnastics by some of the Sussexes fans is quite entertaining.

My reaction to that statement is, why are 12 people so disgruntled after working for the Sussexes?

Remember when someone suggested the Hollywood Reporter article was probably "written by a Brit" 😂

Maybe because they are made to wear Monogrammed uniform pins?!

Seriously though, these are very experienced and qualified personnel who will be used to discerning and demanding management and roles that are stressful. However, they must feel that an invisible line has been crossed into abuse of power territory if not abusive behaviour in itself.

OMG MummyJ12 - monogrammed doormats and pins for their staff to wear? That’s quite extraordinary.

The pins are copying what presidents do. Senior staff have pins to identify them to security services I believe.

I just find it incredible that so many staff, used to working in stressful situations have left, and people are still trying to select blame from the employers. Even if they are disgruntled that's still a lot of unhappy people which doesn't reflect well on Harry and Meghan and the way they run their office.

As the saying goes, if everyone around you is a problem, maybe you are problem.

I was trying to define the word “pretentious” to a student yesterday evening. I think I shall use this as an example from now on 😂😂

I think we can throw ridiculous and grandiose in there too alongside extraordinary and pretentious @Serenster and @smilesy!

At least we now know with absolute certainty that the monogrammed doormat is not a tongue in cheek, poking fun at themselves thing.

Has anyone from The Office of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex (!) issued a strongly worded denial or threatened to sue ?
If someone made untrue allegations in print about me I wouldn’t take it lying down .

@Mylovelygreendress

I used the Google. And found the following,

A message issued by the Sussexes' spokesperson read, "Let's just call this what it is — a calculated smear campaign based on misleading and harmful misinformation. We are disappointed to see this defamatory portrayal of the Duchess of Sussex given credibility by a media outlet. It's no coincidence that distorted several-year-old accusations aimed at undermining the duchess are being briefed to the British media shortly before she and the duke are due to speak openly and honestly about their experience of recent years."

Threatened to sue?

No. Not that I’ve seen.

Was that not referring to the bullying allegations while they were still working royals ?
I am asking if they have issued a denial following the HR article .

I think @Mylovelygreendress they issued a “one disgruntled employee and mis-truths” response to THR but the issue of that response was overtaken by further clarification that they had spoken with 12 employees so the one disgruntled line didn’t cover. Am not aware of any follow up response to the 12

Why are they blaming the British media @Sunsetand ? The Hollywood Reporter is not the British media. The BM if they are reporting it are reporting on words written and printed in American media. Which has been the pattern these last few years. American press write something, UK press repeat it/report on it, U K media get the blame from H&M.

Mylovelygreendress is right - this was the statement made after the The Times broke the bullying story back in 2021. You’ll note it’s very carefully worded, and there is no actual denial.

(And no it wasn’t a coincidence that it was released before the Oprah interview aired - the journalist explained quite carefully that her former staff members felt especially aggrieved that Meghan was about to paint herself to the world as terribly wronged when she had behaved appallingly to her staff during hat period, and they did not have a global platform to express their side of the story as she did).

(Also amusingly, looked at with hindsight, the description “distorted several-year-old accusations aimed at undermining” (the Royal family) used by Meghan’s spokesperson in that response applies very well to her statements in the Oprah interview that was just about to screen. One rule for you and another for your staff, Meghan?)

“distorted several-year-old accusations aimed at undermining”

This is interesting as you say @Serenster - because how were these several years old accusations on the eve of the Oprah interview 2021?

Was this the first time the public had ever heard of these accusation via VL in The Times?

If so MM really outed herself then by indicating that she was actually already aware of several-year-old accusations against her - and is she indicating that the time lapse therefore absolves her or that its now not currently happening (to RF staff!) which would be true as she had left the coutry more than a year before.

Oh God...and on Celebitchy, they are dismissing the previous, uncontested allegations of Meghan's bullying at KP by saying 'all those so-called victims were Kate and Wiliam's staff, and therefore racists'.

We know that Harry admitted the effect Meghan had on these unfortunate professionals in Spare - so the SS can't claim they're false. Therefore, Meghan's victims MUST be racists - obvs.

You could not make it up!