Harry and Meghan

[DeepEnd]

The Spruce Goose said:

DeepEnd said:

Great news!

Thousands of frothy PH angry ranty types give Meghan a massive pile of cash! How generous!

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/02/me...

1.5 million legal costs....

It is a delicious irony.

Pay 70p or whatever to get angry about Mr Potato Head and see all your money go to Meghan.

Some rather potato like heads might explode!

[Randy Winkman]

DeepEnd said:

The Spruce Goose said:

DeepEnd said:

Great news!

Thousands of frothy PH angry ranty types give Meghan a massive pile of cash! How generous!

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/02/me...

1.5 million legal costs....

It is a delicious irony.

Pay 70p or whatever to get angry about Mr Potato Head and see all your money go to Meghan.

Some rather potato like heads might explode!

It is funny. People getting angry about people that say they want to be ignored by not ignoring them and then getting angry because of their reaction to not being ignored.

[hyphen]

DeepEnd said:

The Spruce Goose said:

DeepEnd said:

Great news!

Thousands of frothy PH angry ranty types give Meghan a massive pile of cash! How generous!

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/02/me...

1.5 million legal costs....

It is a delicious irony.

Pay 70p or whatever to get angry about Mr Potato Head and see all your money go to Meghan.

Some rather potato like heads might explode!

I trust you know how much DMGT makes? 1.5m is an inconvenience, but not something they will remember.

The front page apology, if Megs gets it, will be what will embarrass the Mail.

[poolsman]

Disastrous said:

hyphen said:

Countdown said:

hyphen said:

I thinks it's the 'Family' aspect. The Black Sheep/Prodigal Son/ungrateful child type blow ups are always of interest to people.

Why is he the black sheep? I'm not a Royal Watcher but I don't think he's done anything to be particularly ashamed of (once you've discounted the faux-outrage by the likes of the Express). And in relation to "ungrateful" - who cares? I never felt that he owed the Public anything.

But surely everyone would have their cake and eat it, if they could?

What’s the point in having a cake that you can’t eat? A spectacularly pointless turn of phrase that surely must have originated in Yorkshire??

The point being that if you eat your cake you will no longer "have it". Rather you will have "had it". Put simply - you can't have both. The majority of Yorkshire people understand this - but not necessarily because they are from Yorkshire.

Edited by poolsman on Tuesday 2nd March 22:40

[PH_77]

hyphen said:

I trust you know how much DMGT makes? 1.5m is an inconvenience, but not something they will remember.

The front page apology, if Megs gets it, will be what will embarrass the Mail.

I think that Harry will be fairly embarrassed by all of this in a few years' time.

I don't think many people will ever see H and M as being in a genuine relationship, obvious gold digging aside, it could easily be construed as a relationship that has been engineered by a fairly devious, determined, and calculating social climber.

We can all live a life of service.

Servicing our own bank accounts. Nothing more and nothing less.

[hyphen]

PH_77 said:

Servicing our own bank accounts. Nothing more and nothing less.

It's not about money, they have money.

They are seeking popularity, adulation and power. Harry and Meghan can't sit on the British Throne, so they are creating their own thrones.

Diana wanted to be the People's Princess, and the same is happening here. Harry being chummy on Corden interview was to be a man of the people.

Edited by hyphen on Tuesday 2nd March 23:49

[Disastrous]

poolsman said:

The point being that if you eat your cake you will no longer "have it". Rather you will have "had it". Put simply - you can't have both. The majority of Yorkshire people understand this - but not necessarily because they are from Yorkshire.

Edited by poolsman on Tuesday 2nd March 22:40

I think everyone understands it. It’s just a stupid saying.

But it doesn’t change the main point that if you could have both, you would. And some can.

[PH_77]

hyphen said:

It's not about money, they have money.

They are seeking popularity, adulation and power. Harry and Meghan can't sit on the British Throne, so they are creating their own thrones.

Edited by hyphen on Tuesday 2nd March 23:45

Agreed, and their current play is almost certainly down to the fact that they didn't have the sums of money and level of perceived power (and associated perceived influence) that the Meg required when they were playing second fiddle in Frogmore!

Meg for Queen and PM.

I really love listening to their sanctimonious victim bullst.

[poolsman]

Disastrous said:

poolsman said:

The point being that if you eat your cake you will no longer "have it". Rather you will have "had it". Put simply - you can't have both. The majority of Yorkshire people understand this - but not necessarily because they are from Yorkshire.

Edited by poolsman on Tuesday 2nd March 22:40

I think everyone understands it. It’s just a stupid saying.

But it doesn’t change the main point that if you could have both, you would. And some can.

I can't argue with what you think, or regard as stupid. But the main point is not being able to have both and deciding to do so. Its about wanting two things that are mutually incompatible. So you don't really understand it do you ?.

[The Mad Monk]

hyphen said:

Diana wanted to be the People's Princess, and the same is happening here. Harry being chummy on Corden interview was to be a man of the people.

Edited by hyphen on Tuesday 2nd March 23:49

The 'People's Princess' thing was a title given to her by the lisping Anthony Blair.

[purplepenguin]

hyphen said:

PH_77 said:

Servicing our own bank accounts. Nothing more and nothing less.

It's not about money, they have money.

They are seeking popularity, adulation and power. Harry and Meghan can't sit on the British Throne, so they are creating their own thrones.

Diana wanted to be the People's Princess, and the same is happening here. Harry being chummy on Corden interview was to be a man of the people.

Edited by hyphen on Tuesday 2nd March 23:49

Ah, Corden, a man (?} of gravitas, not. Fat child

[Disastrous]

poolsman said:

Disastrous said:

poolsman said:

The point being that if you eat your cake you will no longer "have it". Rather you will have "had it". Put simply - you can't have both. The majority of Yorkshire people understand this - but not necessarily because they are from Yorkshire.

Edited by poolsman on Tuesday 2nd March 22:40

I think everyone understands it. It’s just a stupid saying.

But it doesn’t change the main point that if you could have both, you would. And some can.

I can't argue with what you think, or regard as stupid. But the main point is not being able to have both and deciding to do so. Its about wanting two things that are mutually incompatible. So you don't really understand it do you ?.

But it’s just grumpy people on here saying the things they want are incompatible.

They think they can have both, so good on them if they can.

[Newton472]

Reported today said:

A bullying complaint was lodged against the Duchess of Sussex by a senior member of Kensington Palace staff before she and Prince Harry quit as working royals
The Times reported it was made in October 2018 by Jason Knauf, who worked as communications secretary to Harry and Meghan
He is said to have claimed the duchess 'drove two personal assistants out of the household and was undermining the confidence of a third staff member'
Sensationally, the couple's lawyers told the newspaper it was 'being used by Buckingham Palace to peddle a wholly false narrative' before this weekend's interview with Oprah Winfrey

Spicy!

[vdn]

PH_77 said:

I really love listening to their sanctimonious victim bullst.

Are you sure? You seem terribly upset about it all...

[768]

Disastrous said:

But surely everyone would have their cake and eat it, if they could?

Disastrous said:

I think everyone understands it. It’s just a stupid saying.

But it doesn’t change the main point that if you could have both, you would. And some can.

Are you sure you understand it?!

[anonymoususer]

Nasty people now trying t say that Princess Megsie has been bullying people when everyone knows she is great and nice and she is the one getting bullied grrrrrr

[The Spruce Goose]

anonymoususer said:

Nasty people now trying t say that Princess Megsie has been bullying people when everyone knows she is great and nice and she is the one getting bullied grrrrrr

More twists than a twister.

[pquinn]

anonymoususer said:

Nasty people now trying t say that Princess Megsie has been bullying people when everyone knows she is great and nice and she is the one getting bullied grrrrrr

Also something about wearing 'borrowed' jewelery that was actually a gift from a murderous despot, just after the despot had been extra murderous?

The bullying stuff isn't exactly a shock, all that's happened is the details/confirmation emerging.

[Hosenbugler]

anonymoususer said:

Nasty people now trying t say that Princess Megsie has been bullying people when everyone knows she is great and nice and she is the one getting bullied grrrrrr

This is not fresh news. I was told about this at least 2 years ago, maybe longer. From what I was told, it's 100% spot on. No specific names from what I recall, but as said, is accurate. I've been told quite a lot about her, not much of it good , really should make the effort and post about what I've been let into sometime.

[The Mad Monk]

Hosenbugler said:

This is not fresh news. I was told about this at least 2 years ago, maybe longer. From what I was told, it's 100% spot on. No specific names from what I recall, but as said, is accurate. I've been told quite a lot about her, not much of it good , really should make the effort and post about what I've been let into sometime.

"really should make the effort and post about what I've been let into sometime".

Why didn't you tell us 2 years ago?