The Iffy-Wiff Club: The Sussex Family General Chat Part 1

[wannable]

i guess the point of her was to apologize for her contributing to an environment of hate and harassment. the point is also for her to promote her new website, make a pivot and

the email exchanges were with jason knauff and we know what type of man he is, in those court docs we also know that meghan was weary about doing a book or anything like that but he convinced her to do it, saying it would be good and she trusted williams staff. yes, a mistake on meghan's part to try and trust that man. also a mistake on omid's part to trust that he was sourcing good information from a person who wanted to help the sussex's.

she sent an email to jason to with things about her and then that was sent to omid. we also know via court docs that meghan didn't trust omid at first because he got a story about her wrong pertaining to her stylist, clothes and fashion.

but a man who runs to help a paper that had been out-right racist, abusive and a bully isn't a man that can be trusted. it was a lesson in trusting most people in the palace and thinking they actually had the sussex's wellbeing in mind. of course, it's a palace that runs on trying to make sure the head is the most popular instead of using the popularity for good. a business' when it comes to they deem lesser but still want those lesser to treat them like family.

and as said, the UK court of law, also excused Meghan, had Jason release all of the information that showed the entire story.

and the sussex's patterns are far less different or changed than the media that people like to consume and use as the gotcha against them.

Meghan made Kate cry = 10 different versions, ones that also came out and changed when Meghan stated that she had a note. That was then worked into the story by the British media.

Kate made Meghan cry = two versions, one just saying had it happened and one official version from a person actually close to the story.

And given Kate's behavior at the 2020 Commonwealth, before her name was ever brought up (and brought up in a good way, giving her the cover of being some powerless little lady), it's not hard to believe that instead of going to the tailor's like all of the other parents, she instead chose to harass a bride over dresses so they could be done the way she (kate) wanted WHILE saying that knew Meghan was going through things and reducing another woman to tears.

So, as people chose to believe the sussex's are evil incarnate who have 0 points and nothing bad was done to them, I chose to believe the former who's only spoken about it twice.

And only one version of the entire thing lead to a black woman being called a slave on KP's instagram comments while they did nothing (but they will be sure to delete comments about roses) while there are real creditable right wing threats to said woman's life.

After seeing Princess Lilibet in a dress of the same brand as Princess Charlotte, stockings, little red shoes, I will pass completely the chapter of who made who cried debacle of Charlotte not wearing stocking, ''all'' dresses needed fixing at last minute confirmed by the hired taylor - Meghan and Kate crying, whoever cried, for a Windsor wedding at 12 to 14 degrees Centigrade to a 4th of July parade at varying by hourly Montecito weather report from 20 to 26 degrees centigrade.  She looks cute with the full outfit, period. The End (debacle) for me.


Jason Knauf, he set the record straight with proof of a lie. This is another moment of if it weren't fixed, corrected and known, ''history will judge this statement''. Omid and Meghan are friends since 2015.

Generally, liars need to remember their lies and whom they have lied to keep lies concealed and avoid inconsistency in daily life.  That must be very exhausting.

[LouisFerdinand]

Meghan thought she knew how to run the Royal Family   
Meghan 'thought she knew how to run' the Royal Family - YouTube

[wannable]

WMA strategy: Stir the pot (again, repeat old I'm a victim news until you're whitewashed) with the same old news you did with your previous relation with Sunshine Sach - combine it with elements of your own previous KP Staff, continue playing the victim card no matter what you did to yourself at nterviews, drama docuseries and a book.

Meghan Markle feels Kate Middleton 'got away with' abuse

Meghan Markle, Prince Harry won't stay 'silent' after feud with Beckhams: report

[TLLK]

Discussion about the Archetypes podcasts can be found in the thread linked below.

The Iffy-Wiff Club: Archewell Foundation, Invictus, and other charities, news, a

[Kristeh-H]

WMA strategy: Stir the pot (again, repeat old I'm a victim news until you're whitewashed) with the same old news you did with your previous relation with Sunshine Sach - combine it with elements of your own previous KP Staff, continue playing the victim card no matter what you did to yourself at nterviews, drama docuseries and a book.

Meghan Markle feels Kate Middleton 'got away with' abuse

Meghan Markle, Prince Harry won't stay 'silent' after feud with Beckhams: report

Boy, this is old news.  I will say that Harry and Meghan seem to be very good at burning their bridges.

[wannable]

The nastiness of stirring the pot (again, the Sussexes have already trashed the Princess of Wales at every opportunity, Victoria was trashed once. Reviving the old stories.) is crazy.

I hope Catherine and the Beckhams don't lower themselves to the level of tit for tat Sussex soap opera.

[wannable]

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Extend an Olive Branch to Prince William as Sussexes Determined to End Dramatic Feud

By: Katherine Tinsley
Aug. 8 2023

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry might return to England after their dramatic exit back in 2020. According to a royal insider, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex extended an olive branch to Harry's brother, Prince William, but is the damage from Megxit too much for the royal family to forget?

The Sussexes reached out to the Prince of Wales in the hopes of replacing their old home in the U.K., Frogmore Cottage, with another royal property.

"He and Meghan are offering to rent an apartment at Kensington Palace and furnish it themselves," a source told the outlet. "He hopes that will please William and show that they're serious about coming back.

Meghan Markle, Prince Harry Make Peace Offering With William Amid Feud

[Nightowl]

Just another tabloid drama article put out for the sake of more drama and trouble.

[TLLK]

I just don't see the couple wanting to return to KP, even if it were to be for the occasional visit.

[Kristeh-H]

Agreed.  I don't see this happening.

[TLLK]

To be honest, I'm not sure that anything large and secure enough for the couple would be available for them. The Wales still keep Apt 1A as their official offices and as a London residence when it is needed. The Gloucesters are in one of the converted carriage houses. The Edward Kents are still at Wren House. The Michael Kents are in their apartment that they've had for decades.

Apartment 1 which was last occupied by the Gloucesters is available, but would the Sussexes want to pay rent for KP's largest apartment?

Ivy Cottage is likely being sublet while the Brooksbanks are in Portugal, but I can see them returning to that home in the future.

I'd be curious to see if this was actually true.

[wannable]

For what it's worth, my Fleet Street friend told me there are/will be a lot of puff and trolling pieces emanated from WMA.  He considers the above (and the Neil Sean Balmoral/Windsor one - which I didn't post a link at the Balmoral gathering, only mentioned what he said about Meghans conditions to come over) trolling pieces. Trolling pieces is to get the attention of the BRF.  The UK will receive the trolling pieces whispered, sourced to different RR's and medium/small media outlets as a ''starter''. 

The puff pieces will be US outlets. ETA: That is how the 'tendency' is going on so far, i.e. US People Mag receives a puff piece, they public, British Media requests People Mag if they can print. 

Troll pieces, Neil Sean is British, OK Magazine is British, the later sold the copyright to publish it too to NYPost.

I'm starting to link at the RIF both puff and troll, BUT there has been a lot of both in the past two weeks not posted, links to articles from US/UK based were heavily promoted via social media from the media own official website or sm account.  For historical reference, I think we should - even if it looks too gushy or too absurb.

[Nightowl]

I also don't think that Meghan will ever set foot on British Soil ever again!

[Curryong]

I don?t believe that Harry and Meghan would want to live anywhere near William and Kate ever again, whether at KP or at Windsor. If the couple ever need a bed for a couple of days there are always private London clubs and friends like Elton John have two homes in the city. That article is one of those speculative things that always pops up in the Silly Season when there?s not much genuine royal news to be had.

[TLLK]

@Curryong-I tend to believe that KP is designed more for long term permanent living rather than short term. WC and BP (when renovation work is completed) are typically where guests are lodged for various events. So I tend to believe that the Sussexes would stay there or at one of the places that you mentioned in your post.

[wannable]

The Times and The Sunday Times
@thetimes

The Duke of Sussex has had his HRH removed on the royal family?s website, three years after stepping down as a working member of the family


Prince Harry's HRH title removed from royal website
It came as he visited Japan for a conference on sport, community and philanthropy

Valentine Low | Gavin Blair in Tokyo
Thursday August 10 2023, 12.01am, The Times

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/prince-harry-japan-sports-summit-2023-2qbhfh5bw?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1691648039

[Curryong]

Why is the media so cock a hoop about Harry not being referred to as HRH? That was decided when they left the pool of working royals years ago so it?s hardly come as a revelation to anyone. Oh yes, that?s right it?s because of the media campaign to continue to denigrate and insult Harry and Meghan every five minutes.

Well, Hallo, he?s still a Prince and still King Charles?s son and is still fifth in line of succession to the Throne.  Harry was not responsible for the royal website being so inefficient it had errors including reference to Queen Elizabeth still being monarch all over it. (Says a lot about the modernisation and efficiency of the Palace in general, btw.) So all the rejoicings from the media about this show themselves up rather than anybody else.

And by the way. Valentine Low?s examples in the Times highlight errors that detail Harry?s involvement with various activities and charities in 2016, leave out HRHs even though he was still a working royal and an HRH in that year and others. It also refers to his being the Duke of Sussex in 2016 when he did not receive that title until May 2018.

Thank you Low, for showing these new errors even though I know that was certainly not YOUR intention. No, you wished to humiliate Harry. Instead the Royal website?s new mistakes from yesterday on are highlighted.
So much for the veracity of that website!

[Curryong]

Oh, and by the way the website still lists (on the 11th August 2023)  both of the Sussexes? service to the Crown in this way

?They are balancing their time between the United Kingdom and North America, continuing to honour their duty to the Monarch, the Commonwealth, and their patronages?.

Let Low and the rest of the British media chew on that one!! Lol, lol!

[Curryong]

Another source of merriment on the Royal website as it is constructed now, Aug 11th.

When referring to the Wales?s children? They have three children; a son, George Alexander Louis, born on 22 July 2013, a daughter, Charlotte Elizabeth Diana, born on 2 May 2015, and a son, Prince Louis Arthur Charles, born on 23 April 2018." Not an HRH there for any of them, nor a Prince/Princess for the older two. So only Louis is a Prince (or Prince is his first name, lol).

[wannable]

The website has always been outdated and plagued with mistakes (The Express reported around 71). I'd like William's social media head to take charge of it, he's done a great job with the POW's social media and the DOC.

[sara8150]

Removal of Prince Harry's HRH title from the royal family website was a 'petty' move and Buckingham Palace should take him out of the line of

[TLLK]

There are facts in life that belong in the Team Sussex, at that time when Meghan was 13 @TLLK is right, aired March 1995 - and as what I said, a minor age, she still would need a permit by California law to work as a minor. Period.  Nothing more, nothing less. Thank you Thomas Markle. 

Meghan also before meeting Harry, wrote wonderful things about her father in her blog The Tig.

For Suits, she was of age, she doesn't need permission from anyone to work.  No one mentioned at Team Sussex - Thank you Thomas Markle for Suits, but solely for the Minor Age stint.

There are THINGS H or M or Both do that by critical analysis DOES NOT need to be IMO in the Iffy wif , but there at the Team Sussex thread. I have posted there at Team Sussex such type of news. 

One can be critical, but there are instances too that there isn't anything to criticize.

Why would it be considred a Snark PREVIOUS 2016 for instance about Thomas Markle when Meghan herself wrote sweet notes about her father.

This is getting quite out of hand because some of us actually feel that one can post in both threads using our brains of what is and what not rather than be in an extreme cult of your in or out. 

It's possible that Meghan's parents had allowed her to get an acting permit just in case she landed a part in a commercial or on a series. I don't believe that any director would have been allowed to just let her or anyone else be there without a permit. Her parents would have had to sign a consent form of some sorts even if Thomas was present there.

Okay...so the answer would be yes that Meghan would be required to have a permit. I had a few students who were doing auditions, so their parents had to provide proof of a satisfactory report from the school about their attendance, grades and behavior.

A sincere thank you goes to the late Jackie Coogan! This silent era child actor's greedy parents used all of his earnings and left him broke. Today's entertainment child labor laws are sometimes called the "Jackie Coogan Law." https://www.sagaftra.org/membership-benefits/young-performers/coogan-law

Does my Child Actor Need a Work Permit? | Hometown to Hollywood - Bonnie J. Wallace

All states regulate employment for children, whether they are actors or not.

The State of California requires any child under the age of 18 (with a few exceptions) to have a valid and current work permit before they are allowed to work in the entertainment industry.

The first thing to notice about this is that if your child lands a job where they begin shooting the next day or so (not unusual) you will have a serious problem unless their work permit is already secured. So take care of this before they begin auditioning! This applies not only to acting jobs, but also to commercials, modeling, and vocal recording. The permits are valid for six months and renewable every six months while the child is under the age of 18.

There are services that take care of this process for you for a fee, but this is really unnecessary. The six-month permits are free of charge, and the first time you apply, you will need to be able to supply a birth certificate or other legally acceptable proof of birth date. Both first time, and all renewal applications for the work permit, must include approval from the child?s school?specifically, an authorized school administrator must verify that your child?s attendance and grades are ?satisfactory.? Note that this is an excellent incentive for your child to keep up their grades and attendance! The school?s approval is a necessary part of getting the work permit.

[wannable]

Quite from one parent or the other, but it's public knowledge because Meghan herself posted in The Tig about her dad being a Director of Lighting, Electricity at that particular show where she appeared as a Minor Age. She also wrote in The Tig that she would go there Daily after school - other than watch the action from behind the scenes, she was allowed to have her lunch, snack or dinner at the buffet table, a spread that was there also daily. This has 99.9% more to do with her father as a Director of that show (who factually won Emmy's for that show in his category vs 7 other competitors) than anyone else she can possibly mention today vs what she mentioned previous meeting H via her Tig blog.

These are facts that are undisputed and not snark. Why can't anyone or ME say thanks to something GOOD that happened then?! Quite mindblowing to be honest.

There are good truths and bad truths. I am not an extremist who needs to choose a thread or another.  I am capable of using my thinking cap/brain and post where IMO should be posted.

[Nightowl]

 :goodpost:

[TLLK]

I'm placing the article here as the title focuses more on Meghan than Harry. Meghan dropped in the poll but Harry's doing better than he had been in previous polls which is a bonus.. The polling was done by Redfield and Wilton who had conducted an earlier poll in June 2023.

Meghan Markle Still Hasn't Won Back America?But Harry Has

Meghan Markle's popularity has taken a knock with more Americans disliking her than liking her for the first time in five months?but Prince Harry is still viewed positively, according to exclusive polling for Newsweek.

Harry's book Spare sent the couple's standing with U.S. adults nose-diving in January, but it appears to be Meghan rather than her prince who is struggling to bounce back.

A new poll of 1,500 U.S. adults conducted between September 3 and September 4 showed Meghan was liked by 31 percent and disliked by 33 percent, giving her a net approval rating of minus 2.This is down eight points since Newsweek's last royal poll with Redfield & Wilton in June, when she was on plus 6.

Prince Harry, meanwhile, was liked by 39 percent and disliked by 27 percent giving him a net approval rating of plus 12, a drop of six points since June when he was on plus 18.

While both remain a long way from their popularity before Harry's book came out, the prince is at least comfortably more liked than disliked.

The fieldwork was done on Sunday and Monday, after Meghan and Harry were seen partying to Beyonce on Friday, September 1, and starting on the same day Prince Harry was pictured watching LAFC play Inter Miami in the MLS.