The only logical explanation I see for Rachel and her style choices is that she suffers from Achromatopsia, and a lot of people trolling her by lying about the color in front of her. So from here on out when I post pics of Rachel they will be in black/white/gray.
Notice how her dress and Harry’s tie match and the dark blue clutch is a great contrast.
The Altazurra trouser suit, €1,650, the Falabella Stella McCartney clutch, €425, the black suede Aquzurra pumps, €220, a €325 camisole by Deitas and a pair of pearl earrings gifted to her by Queen Elizabeth (price unknown, but worth at least €2,000) does not exactly exude a ‘princess of the people’ image
Thanks for sending this in! The ironic part is that they are complaining about a 5k outfit, which is on THE LOW END for Meghan. I didn’t even bitch about the cost of that outfit because Meghan’s average outfit cost is now somewhere near the five figures.
I suspect the straw that broke the camel’s back was that it was a 5k plain black pantsuit and it’s the fourth thousand-dollar black pantsuit she owns.
The “crappy thing to do to a friend” referred to the fact that they brought their own paps, something I concluded after the same pap took close-up reception pics and long-lens pics of Harry at the beach and Harry only filed an official complaint regarding the (presumably unauthorized) beach pics. The reception pics were published pretty much everywhere without complaints being filed.
Well, well, well, even Lainey is now bitching about the “Best Dressed Star” label and acknowledging (for the first time ever!) that the People accolades are all because Meghan and Harry and leaking like crazy to the magazine.
Well… I attended Juilliard… I’m a graduate of the Harvard business
school. I travel quite extensively. I lived through the Black Plague and
had a pretty good time during that. I’ve seen the EXORCIST ABOUT A
HUNDRED AND SIXTY-SEVEN TIMES, AND IT KEEPS GETTING FUNNIER EVERY SINGLE
TIME I SEE IT… NOT TO MENTION THE FACT THAT YOU’RE TALKING TO A DEAD
GUY… NOW WHAT DO YOU THINK? You think I’m qualified?
It would be nice if anyone suddenly thinking she’s pregnant would stop and realize that she looked like her super thin self just a week ago at the Hamilton event. That was eight days ago.
I really do think she looks uncomfortable in this pic from the WellChild awards. She’s just so far to the side and harry is literally leaning over to fill the gap.
Yep.
Her smile is saying “Get me out of here! I need to get away from these kids!”
I suspect part of the problem is that she thinks she thinks of herself as a designer who had her own clothing line. She thinks she knows better, so she doesn’t listen to the people advising her.
Meghan looks somehow tranquilized and wired at the same time. Talk about magic.
She’s zoned out and trying to compensate for it. I wonder why she hit the Xanax this time. Are we getting another daddy interview this weekend?
Probably. Didn’t he give a 9-hour interview to the Daily Mail back in early August? And they probably haven’t published everything he told them as of yet.
You claim, on the opinion pages of the “failing” New York Times no less, that senior officials working for the president of the United States “are working diligently from within to frustrate parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.”
“I would know,” you add dramatically. “I am one of them.”
Sorry, what was the point of this particular piece? And what is it that you want from the rest of us? A thank-you card? A round of applause? The nation’s undying gratitude?
Screw. You.
There is no redemption; no exoneration for you or your colleagues inside this shit-show of an administration. You think an op-ed in the paper of record is going to cut it? Gimme a break. You cannot write an article admitting to the president’s “anti-democratic” impulses while also saying you want his administration “to succeed.” You cannot publish a 965-word piece excoriating Donald Trump’s “worst inclinations” while omitting any and all references to his racism, bigotry, Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, and white nationalism.
You did find space, however, to heap praise on yourself and your fellow officials. “Unsung heroes.” “Adults in the room.” “Quiet resistance.” “Steady state.”
The reality is that you and your fellow officials are enablers of Trump; you are his protectors and defenders. You say it yourself. Why were there only “whispers within the cabinet of invoking the 25th Amendment,” which provides for the cabinet to remove the president from office if he is unable to do the job? Why not invoke it and let Mike Pence take over? (Are you, by the way, Mike Pence?)
If as you claim — and we all agree! — that the president you serve “continues to act in a manner that is detrimental to the health of our republic” with “misguided impulses,” then how can you advocate for anything other than his swift removal from office?
Your defense is that “no one wanted to precipitate a constitutional crisis.” Seriously? You don’t agree with former Secretary of State John Kerry that we’re already in the midst of “a genuine constitutional crisis,” given your own op-ed outlining his “erratic behavior” and “reckless decisions” and Bob Woodward’s new book describing “an administrative coup d’etat” and a “nervous breakdown” at the center of the Trump White House?
You are keen to remind the liberal readers of the New York Times that yours “is not the popular ‘resistance’ of the left” and that you believe this administration’s policies have “already made America safer and more prosperous.” You cite “historic tax reform” and “effective deregulation” as the supposed “bright spots that the near-ceaseless negative coverage of the administration fails to capture.” But by tax reform, do you mean the Trump tax cuts that give the richest 1 percent of Americans almost half of the benefits? And by deregulation, do you mean the rescinding of Obama-era protections for the oceans; the lifting of controls on toxic air pollution; and the green light to Wall Street to once again cause havoc in the financial markets?
What is it, then, that you object to? Well, it seems, your biggest concern is “not what Mr. Trump has done to the presidency,” but how Americans have “sunk low with him and allowed our discourse to be stripped of civility.”
Also, what did you think would happen when you signed up to work for a reality TV star who was accused of sexual assault by more than a dozen women, and of rape by his first wife? Who stiffed hundreds of contractors, ripped off Trump University students, cheated on his third wife just months after she gave birth, and cut off health care coverage to his own nephew’s sick baby in a fit of rage?
You knew all of this and yet you still chose to work for him at the highest level of government. You now acknowledge that “the root of the problem is the president’s amorality.” But how about your own amorality? I hate to agree with your boss, but you are “gutless.” You’re a shameless coward, a cynical opportunist.
Don’t hide behind anonymity. Don’t pretend that you have “gone to great lengths” to restrain Trump and “put country first.”
Tell us your name. Quit your job. Call out this president in public.
Call him out for his bigotry, his mendacity, his sheer mental and emotional unfitness for the office he occupies. Call him out in front of a congressional committee. Or a court of law.
“When the [Wonder Woman] TV show came out, I was twelve years old, and I just never seen anything like it in my life. I mean, soon as the going got tough, you saw this woman who was seemingly demure and sweet and beautiful and all of that. [Diana] could transform into this superhero and just get the job done. It wasn’t about her trading in her femininity or her intelligence. She wasn’t vindictive towards other women. She was just her. And the lasso, and the bulletproof bracelets
― I mean, that sort of superhuman power associated with being a girl… I’ve never seen anything like it. I’m still a twelve-year-old girl. I try to talk her off the ledge every once in a while, but I’m still a twelve-year-old girl.” ― Viola Davis on her obsession with Wonder Woman
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984) dir. Steven Spielberg
I believe we have an obligation to read for pleasure, in private and in public places. If we read for pleasure, if others see us reading, then we learn, we exercise our imaginations. We show others that reading is a good thing.
I doubt it was Canadian cops. Wendell can tell a Canadian from a Brit.
Even if it was an RPO, it still means someone from the UK was shelling out money for Megsy to have that level of security, which she certainly did not merit.
They’ll likely try that, but is it believable? I mean, look at the big picture. He flew an actress he’d just met to Botswana on a work trip, then he gave her royal security, then he flew to see her after an official tour, all in the space of a few months. He got away with A LOT.
I’m beginning to wonder if this article will end up opening the door to more articles in Fleet Street exposing money shenanigans, particularly those by Megs and Harry.
Maybe, but I don’t think Wendell would mistake UK secret agents for Canadian private security. He’s an actor. He’s used to having security around.
Cui bono? That is, who benefits? Megsy does NOT benefit from this story.
1) With all her clothes spending, she does not need stories circulating that she got more protection than Kate before Kate became engaged to William. And for an ENTIRE YEAR!
2) Megsy clearly cut Wendell off since he wasn’t at the wedding. More likely, he figures he has nothing to lose in telling stories about her when he worked with her on Suits. And he’s right, he doesn’t really have anything to lose.
I don’t see how they can bury it. It’s apparently an interview he did for Extra so there must be video out there somewhere. You don’t get more legitimate than first person recollection caught on video for a different publisher.
And what are they going to say? That they paid privately for Mi5 to follow Meghan around? Is that even possible? That a US actor mistook private security for Mi5? That’s pretty ridiculous.
Given the timing of this story, I’m beginning to wonder if anything else is just going to fall out of the cracks in the next two weeks.
I don’t know if it was truly MI5, but I have no doubt the security was British. Like AHPF said, “As if a television actor would be impressed by American bodyguards. NBC has tons of them.” Wendell has been working in Hollywood for more than 20 years. He was in Waiting to Exhale with Whitney Houston. And that was back when Whitney was a superstar and hadn’t hit the decline that you saw in the 2000s. Wendell has been around long enough to figure out the difference between bodyguard employments. I have no doubt the security was British and not paid by NBC.
I’m very curious to see who pounces on this and whether they let KP brush them off with a haughty non-denial. This is potentially a big deal. There’s no “they might have been engaged” here.
Well, maybe it was just a drop in the bucket compared to all the cash they’re letting her spend on her clothes…
Even still, this girl racks up QUITE the expense bill!
LOL, and I was bitching about a couple of hours at Invictus. This would be hundreds of thousands in taxpayer money. There were rumors that Doria had RPOs in LA too. I wonder if those were true too.
Yup. This chick gets whatever she wants and still complains. Nothing is good enough for her. Meanwhile, Kate really did suffer harassment for years.
Every day since the day the relationship was announced? Reeeeeaaaaaalllllyyyyyyy? This isn’t an anonymous source. This is an eyewitness from the show putting his name on it. I wonder if anyone will comment.
When you think about all the harassment Kate received from the paparazzi, this is really ridiculous.
Every day since the day the relationship was announced? Reeeeeaaaaaalllllyyyyyyy? This isn’t an anonymous source. This is an eyewitness from the show putting his name on it. I wonder if anyone will comment.
Ah yes they leaked their own relationship and need MI5 protection. I’m not surprised by the abuse of power.
“As soon as it came out that they were dating, everyone was warned to stop talking or they would be fired”
I don’t find it a coincidence that Wendell didn’t attend the wedding and is now spitting out these details…
Screen shots of this article in case it disappears…
I’m not going to do an actual reading for Eugenie and Jack’s wedding, but I will just comment that I don’t think there is anything to worry about. There is a Saraswati Yoga happening several days right before the wedding. Then there is a Gaja Kesari yoga happening the day of the wedding. These will likely produce a happy atmosphere for the wedding.
Plus, the Moon is in Anuradha, which is a good nakshatra (lunar mansion) to get married in.
I don’t see any reason to be worried about their wedding. If they were getting married a couple weeks later–on say October 25 or 26–then that might not be as favorable for marriage. But I don’t see any real reason to worry.
I imagine that any of the fireworks that people are anticipating (between Harry & Megs) will start either the week after the wedding or in late October.
There’s no place like home for a pair of ruby slippers used in “The Wizard of Oz,” recovered in an FBI sting last month 13 years after they were stolen from a Minnesota museum. The FBI said in a news release yesterday that the shoes were among several pairs of the ruby red slippers worn by actress Judy Garland in her iconic portrayal of Dorothy Gale. This particular pair was insured for $1 million and investigators offered a $250,000 reward for its return. #wizardofoz https://www.instagram.com/p/BnWlatjHH-S/?utm_source=ig_tumblr_share&igshid=vcy6xtreqrfk
Nope. Can’t say I’m surprised though. If someone offers her something really expensive to wear, she’ll clearly wear it even if it doesn’t fit well and isn’t suitable for the occasion.
Most people carry that pain around inside them their whole lives, until they kill the pain by other means, or until it kills them. But you, my friends, you found another way: a way to use the pain. To burn it as fuel, for light and warmth. You have learned to break the world that has tried to break you.
Hi plant, the issue of Kate working vs. not and the perceived resentment it brings up is interesting. I’m 32 so squarely in the “old millennial” segment. I’m also a career woman with a MBA living in a high COL coastal city and most of my friends are also high-earning professionals as well. The trend of being very hands-on, even stay-at-home parenting is the ultimate status symbol in my cohort and I’ve known a lot of women who’ve made the conscious decision to leave or significantly dial back their high powered careers for stay at home parenting, at least while the kids are young. Now, a lot of it is an issue of numbers – in the US work life balance is notoriously poor (finance and law regularly requires 90 hr weeks, and that’s if your privelidged; otherwise you’re pulling in 4 fast food shifts just to make ends meet) and child care is prohibitively expensive. But even without those considerations, people in my set love to be “crunchy” in certain ways – organic farmer’s markets, home cooking, going to therapy, etc. I believe it has to do with a very specific generational backlash – from being raised in an era when divorce rates were at its peak, when postpartum depression wasn’t spoken of and parents just drank too much or popped Valium, when very lax parenting and TV dinners were acceptable to kids. So my generation wants to, and understands, the desire to be a very hands on, conscientious, kind parents. This is a very American perspective so we don’t have the burden of feeling like she’s sucking away at our tax dollars -but at least in my circle there is never any judgement of her not working. She seems like a great mother, and as a woman from a wealthy family business she likely would have taken time off to raise kids had she married someone else.
On the flip side, I think she and William may get a lot more judgement from this generation if they did Charles or even QE style parenting – nannies all the time, dragging them out for publicity, and boarding school ASAP. (Of course W+K have lots of help, but I doubt their nannies are the primary nurterer in their lives the way Charles’ or even Will’s nannies were.) This is the type of parental relationship our generation is working very hard to undo. In short, they still remain “aspirational” to us – bc given the same circumstances, I personally don’t think that I would make choices different from their’s.
Thanks for sending this in!
Oh, I don’t think there’s a lot of judgement outside of a few fandom pockets. I obviously have very specific ideas as how things should be done, but they are not widely shared. If work ethic were the be-all and end-all of popularity, then Anne would be the most popular royal, and she isn’t, not by a long shot, even among avowed monarchists.
And, given the royals’ various parenting mishaps and what they’ve cost the crown, a good argument could be made that parenting should be Will and Kate’s number one priority. Also, their mental health work gets a lot more press than any number of ribbon-cuttings would get and their two-week-a-month schedule is optimized for maximum publicity. So they are effective at what they do.
I still believe they should get out more, they should embrace smaller patronages, and they should attend more ribbon-cuttings because I think this is the type of royal work that makes a difference in the long run. Being visible, participating in local celebrations, and supporting small events is, imo, just as important (maybe more) to national cohesion and royal imagery than splashy initiatives like Heads Together. A third of Britons have seen HM in person, compared to 5% for the younger royals. That figure really should go up, imo. One reason HM is so popular is the she has devoted her life to being a visible symbol of the country.
But, I suspect, this is not a widely-held opinion. The work they do is effective and well-publicized and they are more popular than most of the other, harder-working royals. So people seem to like what they are doing. I suspect the work ethic issue is not as much of a negative as people think (although I personally do still feel strongly about it).
This theory will likely be tested in the upcoming months, as I believe KP will make a big “hard-working” pr push on behalf of Megs shortly. I’m very curious to see how that works out.
House of Brat 