Article Round Up: Meghan talks Serena, Mike talks Meghan, Meghan bypasses passport lines?

Article Round Up: Meghan talks Serena, Mike talks Meghan, Meghan bypasses passport lines?

Here’s a little round up of some articles from the past week or so. Meghan Markle gave a quote to Vogue about Serena Williams for a recent cover story of her. Mike Tindall spoke about Meghan again. And the Express has a story about Meghan bypassing passport queues when she flies into London.

Serena Williams covers the September 2017 issue of Vogue US and they did a long piece about her tennis career and her pregnancy. One of the quotes from Williams’ friends is from Meghan, who told Vogue:

“She will be an amazing mom. The very best, because she is so attuned to balancing strength and sensitivity. Plus, given that she is pretty epic at karaoke, I think she’ll put her signature Serena spin on singing lullabies for the baby. I can’t wait for that!”


I chuckled at the karaoke line. I don’t know if it was supposed to be sarcastic or not, but I read it that way and I thought it was cute.

Back in June, Mike Tindall spoke to The Sun about wanting Meghan to get him a cameo on Suits, and now he’s back to give more commentary.

“Prince Harry’s girlfriend Meghan Markle has won her first seal of ­approval from the Royal Family. But the American telly star has been warned that joining The Firm, as the royals are nicknamed, will be nerve-racking. Speaking exclusively to the Sunday People, Zara Phillips’ ­husband Mike Tindall is the first member of the royals to publicly comment on Harry’s year-long relationship with the 36-year-old beauty from the TV legal drama Suits. Ex-England rugby star Mike, married to Harry’s cousin, is confident the actress will survive the same intense public scrutiny that he experienced after joining The Firm.

“Mike, 38, a ‘commoner’ like Meghan, said: ‘It comes with a lot of history and the family that it is. It’s obviously nerve-racking. But she has been under enough scrutiny and pressure in her day-to-day life so I’m sure she will get through it. She will be fine. As long as they are both happy that’s all that you can ask for. She’ll do absolutely fine.’

“Mike and Zara, 36, are expected to meet Meghan in the coming months. Fun-loving Harry, 32, is said to be particularly close to fellow royal rebel Zara, the horse-riding enthusiast who stunned the royals by piercing her tongue. Mike, a member of the 2003 World Cup-winning rugby squad, continued: ‘We haven’t met yet. It will be nice to meet her.’

“He also revealed his love of Meghan’s hit show Suits, a smooth-talking drama set in a top New York law firm. Meghan plays Rachel Zane who is romantically linked to legal hotshot Michael Ross, played by Patrick J. Adams. Speaking at the 2017 Farmfoods British Par 3 golf championship at Nailcote Hall, Warwickshire, this week, Mike said: ‘I’m obviously a big Suits fan. It’s a very good show. I will definitely try and get the inside scoop on it.'”


I think Meghan’s acting skills will be a huge benefit to her if/when she marries Harry, because she knows how to be “on” and that will come in very handy when doing engagements and speaking to people.

Lastly, Camilla Tominey at the Express has a new article about how Prince Harry got Meghan special access or something so that she can go straight from the plane to his car and doesn’t have to go through passport lines when she flies into London.

“PRINCE HARRY has been collecting his girlfriend Meghan Markle directly from the tarmac at Heathrow airport in a growing sign of the seriousness of their relationship, it has been claimed. The Prince has pulled strings to ensure the American actress can walk straight from the plane steps to his waiting Audi RS6 when she lands in London, bypassing the usual passport queues. Sources at Heathrow claim the Suits star has been whisked away by Harry on a number of occasions, most recently when she arrived from her home town of Toronto for Pippa Middleton’s wedding in May.

“One insider said Harry, 32, instigated the new arrangements after the 36-year-old kept being photographed at Terminal 2, where Air Canada operates. ‘It’s been happening for a while,’ said a well-placed source. ‘Harry has a police escort on the tarmac in his black Audi RS6. He is accompanied by a bodyguard, with a people carrier following behind. Meghan usually only carries hand luggage. If she does check a suitcase into the hold it is put on last so it can be located as quickly as possible. All the necessary security checks must be carried out in advance or onboard because she walks straight from the plane steps to Harry’s car.’

“Another insider claimed the couple had been offered use of the Windsor Suite, where VIPs are escorted directly to their aircraft after being security-screened away from the masses, but Harry decided to make his own arrangements. The source added: ‘It costs £3,000 a time to use the Windsor Suite so it is quite expensive.’ The private lounge is used by royals, the Prime Minister and members of the Cabinet when making official trips abroad as well as visiting dignitaries.

“Kensington Palace declined to comment. Former head of royalty protection Chief Superintendent Dai Davies said royals would habitually be collected directly from the tarmac when he worked at the Palace. He added: ‘Given who Harry is, given that he is accompanied by Met police officers and that any security checks would be preordained then I don’t find it that unusual.’

“A Heathrow spokesman said: ‘The aviation and protective security arrangements for members of the Royal Family, including their movements through the airport, are confidential and fully compliant with regulatory requirements. It would be inappropriate to discuss those arrangements in public.'”


So that’s happening, I guess. Tominey teased her exclusive on Twitter before the article was posted online as something interesting, but I’m pretty bored by this. We already knew that Meghan was being escorted through airports, so this is kind of like, yeah that makes sense.

61 thoughts on “Article Round Up: Meghan talks Serena, Mike talks Meghan, Meghan bypasses passport lines?

  1. It’s holiday time so are the press looking for anything to fill the pages?

    Of course Meghan would be going through Customs etc beforehand, on the plane. By doing it there that means it’s easier to process the rest of the passengers without the hold ups of having paps chasing Meghan around the airport? Makes sense to me.

    IMO, this is a non story?

    1. Totally agree that the Express story is a non story. It’s like, eh okay, tell me something interesting.

        1. yeah. Another thing people want to complain about. Partly seems for security reasons, as well. A non-story determined to whip up a frenzy of angry people.

          Meghan being an actress is probably used to such treatment anyway. Private jets, cars on the tarmac, etc. You see it a lot at LAX.

        2. I also found it odd that Mike would chat with the press like this about Harry’s gf. Isn’t that considered a bit gauche for a member of the family?

          1. Maybe it is because Mike is continually asked about her so he says something? I find it weird. He seems like a nice guy but like you said…gauche.

          2. I find it very strange that he seemingly gets away with talking about his family members when if another married in royal were to talk about the other royals in this way they’d be 1) criticized by the public, and 2) seemingly admonished by the royals.

      1. Thank you for doing such a great job MMR. I know I don’t give you credit often enough but I do really enjoy reading your articles on both your blogs and I do appreciate you so very much. God bless. I’m just wondering if you ever took creative writing in college? Just curious.

  2. I am astounded MMR by your ability to take a non-story and turn it into a nice post! Thanks for filling in the time between Meghan sightings.

    Since we never see going-to-yoga or taking-dog-to-vet shots anymore I assume that she is driving everywhere and going in back doors to avoid the paps. I don’t think I’d like to live my life this way, not being able to walk anywhere, having to sneak in back doors, just the whole cloak and dagger thing would get old really fast.

  3. Here are my rambling thoughts in no order.
    -Mike sure is chatty in regards to Meghan which I find interesting.
    -Is Harry paying for all these expenses himself or is he getting Charles to pay and if so is it his private money or is he using taxpayers? Because private security costs are expensive and then if you add the $3 grand for airport each visit, it sure adds up. She could be paying airport costs herself but still enquiring minds want to know because I find BRF completely shady when it comes to their costs. And on a side note if Harry doesn’t up his numbers he really shouldn’t get rent free accommodations!
    -I do think her being an actress will help. We already know she’s good at public speaking. As much as I dislike Sofia I have to say of course she’s decent at giving a speech or being in public. if you can make out with Jenna Jamison on tv you obviously are going to have no qualms with public speaking or being in the spot light! Even Diana acknowledged that it was a role she played.
    This has nothing to do with Meghan but her friend Serena. I just have to say how much I hated Serena’s comment about how she’s about to become a real woman once she gives birth. It’s a shame that she thinks that child birth is the defining moment of womanhood.

    1. If Harry is the one picking her up from the airport of course he’d need his security. I figure the taxpayer pays, as they do for all security and travel costs, including residence-to-residence which is sketchy AF.

      1. Sorry I was jet lagged and tired when I posted initially and read that they were using the VIP windsor lounge but see he’s forgone that.
        Maybe he should stop talking about how they don’t won’t to be a celebrity and just normal bloke doing his meat shopping like the rest of us yet then does stuff like this!!
        Hope those that get to see the eclipse tomorrow have happy viewing! I flew back a few days early so I could see it!! Yay

    2. The article actually says that they don’t use the 3k suite, but he picks her up at the tarmac. This is pretty normal for royals, they hardly ever have to go through the airport, but are picked up directly at the the tarmac. Harry’s RPOs are wherever he goes, they are paid regardless of Meghan or if Harry decides to spend his day at KP or go out.

      1. So normal…. passport stops are a burden, but glad to see Harry is so committed to his normalacy.

    3. I don’t think I’d be able to handle this lifestyle, either. Perhaps it proves that she’s really interested in him for love and not for the fame. Love seems to be the only thing that could keep a person sane while jumping through all of these hoops!

  4. Meghan should go through regular airport checks like everyone else why the public should pay for harry and his protection officers to pick up his girlfriend is beyond me I remember only one occasion when he picked up chelsy the rest of the time she made do like every one else the fact he does this on the down low makes you wonder how many other secret visits and trips abroad (italy) are we paying for its estimated we pay 100 mil a year on their sercurity 😐

    1. Hi Danielle, I noticed that you stated just about the same thing on the KMR site and as fellow posters mentioned there, anyone with enough money can circumvent regular airport checks.

      1. But he didn’t pay any money they decided not to pay the 3 grand to go wait in the lounge if anyone else refused the deal they would not be allowed of before everyone else they certainly would be allowed a car on the tarmac you only see that with politicians and head of state for sercurity reasons so he’s basically used his royal privalige which shouldn’t be allowed

        1. Question, if he has royal privilege why shouldn’t he use it? By avoiding regular security this might be of benefit for those traveling on the same plane as Meghan, avoiding the insistent paps and the delays caused by them would certainly be a benefit. Personally, if I was on the same flight as her, I’d want her off the plane and gone as soon as possible in order to expedite my departure.

          1. Because Harry’s just a normal bloke, don’t ya know. He does his own grocery shopping and everything. 😉

          2. Harry constantly complains he wants to be normal but quite happily uses his royal privalige when he thinks no ones looking all we see of him is his pr narrative he’s becoming another andrew

          3. I notice that none of the married-ins, who know what normal means, whine about being normal. The born-royals have no idea about normal life at all.

        2. Usually if you travel by private jet you can avoid a lot of the security that the peasants need to go through. However, since Meaghan is flying internationally and using Air Canada, in theory she would have to deal with it, except Harry can waive her out of it. I have to think that it’s because the relationship is basically pre engagement at this point because there are liability issues for airports to ignore this stuff and they wouldn’t be doing it for a mere fling.

        3. I’ve been on planes where a VIP has used a car on the tarmac to the plane service. Seems sensible to me. It was very quick and I didn’t feel like it held me up at all. The VIP in this case was not a politican or a Head of State.

          Even if Harry and Meghan were using the VIP lounge there is little privacy, and that would cause delays as people would be watching them and not getting on with going through customs, etc. And there would be hold ups with people stopping and wanting to take photos.

          IMO this is the most effective way around it? It causes the least amount of delays and disruption. The airlines and the airports want the passengers/ luggage and the planes turned around as quickly as possible so moving VIPs on with the least amount of fuss benefits them.

        4. And it is also from The Express which is notoriously unreliable and makes up pretty much everything. So take it all with a grain of salt.

  5. There’s an article–not sure if you wanna cover it here or KMR?–about Harry defending his dad in some doco that’s coming up about Diana, saying how Charles did a great job as effectively a single parent and he always felt loved, supported, and taken care of by his dad, in response to criticisms levied that Charles was an unloving, cold parent (hey, I wonder if Harry knows the person who started those rumors…his mum). The article is in the Metro I believe.

    1. With all due respect, Charles taking good care of his sons and being there for them during their most difficult time at the time has absolutely nothing to do with how Diana felt about him and his affair with Camilla or how Charles and Camilla treated Diana and her sons. It was Charles’ responsibility as a parent to grieve with his sons in the most supporting way possible, he is their father, that’s what fathers do and are supposed to do. It was also Charles’ responsibility as a father and husband to stay faithful to his wife Diana and keep his sons from growing up in a broken family (that’s what husbands are supposed to do; Charles failed miserably when he chose to do the former but not the latter (these are known facts) and he alone is to blame for whatever the outcome was, not his late wife. I think we all should take a page from these princes’ book. A lot nasty stuff has been said about both Charles and Diana but none of these princes have in any way shape or form confirmed or condoned any of these rumours, (and they know/knew both parents better than anyone else), if they aren’t speaking evil of their parents, everyone else should just leave it alone, thats MVHO.

      1. Diana had a hand in portraying Charles as this cold, uncaring, awful father, and the media ran with it and pushed it and still pushes the narrative. I mean, letters exist of her complaining he was involved with his children, because she felt it was her domain?
        I don’t know, I mean, this is the woman who fired nannies for getting too close to her sons and spread nasty, awful rumors about them. (My mom would have so done the same thing, man, was she possessive of me. Instead she went after my stepmom, who was the only stable person in my life growing up and wouldn’t play ball with my mom’s crap, which made her angrier… Okay, I’m venting…) And it seems to me W&H were pushing it recently with that documentary. Poor us, our mum died, we had nobody, we’re motherless boys when in fact we are grown men. Along with the media of course because Diana gets clicks and outrage gets more, playing into the “poor us our mother died and we had nobody! Dad is awful!” when the opposite is true.

        I’ve grown up in a broken home. I am not of course a public person, but I have an idea of just how crappy it was for W&H. It damages you for life, and neither parent is ever the saint and the sinner for they’re people and they both eff up. I’ve forgiven my parents for their problems–including my dad’s affairs, and my mom’s abuse and loads of other stuff–so it is not surprising at least to me that Harry has done. Diana cheated too, and wasn’t the saint she had the world portray her as. They both were human, as are we all. And as a Christian I believe both of them should be forgiven for their adultery, the way they treated people, etcetera. But neither is Diana a victim nor is Charles, and neither are demons or sinners. Just people. I tend to go more on Charles’s side because I find the outright demonizing of him quite unfair.

        1. Excuse me but, any man that cheats on his family is a cold, uncaring awful father. A man that abandons his wife and young kids, a man that chooses the mistress over his wife and young sons is a selfish, cold, uncaring, awful father, regardless of whether that man is Charles POW. Whatever Diana said about Charles was a precipitation of Charles coldly and maliciously carrying on an affair with Camilla and choosing his mistress over his wife and kids, Im not faulting Diana for anything she said or did in retaliation, sorry. The only thing I will ever hold against Di was her using William to get back at her then husband (and I say this loosely too since its a rumour rather than a well documented fact). If Charles had not cheated on Diana but rather Diana cheated first and made mean remarks about Charles, then all blame would be on Diana. However, Charles made a conscious choice and decision to marry a young woman that he didn’t even like leave alone love, he made a conscious choice to leave that young woman and their young sons and carry on an affair with Camilla, that puts all blame squarely on Charles, not on Diana nor on their sons. The consequences of cheating on a spouse are a bitter ex that says nasty stuff, smears your name for the rest of their days, sometimes cheats right back on you (like Diana did) but in all that one has nobody to blame but themselves for they should have known better that to even go there. Charles is solely to blame for whatever happened in their marriage, why? He should have known better than to get involved and marry Diana, he didn’t love her, he should have left her alone. After marrying her, he should have stayed faithful because it was not Diana fault that Charles caved to his parent’s demands (if at all those rumours were true), it was all Charles fault, he should have followed his heart and let the chips fall where they may. But he was a coward who was not man enough to stand up for what he believed in but chose to do none of the above, I don’t blame Diana one little bit. As the saying goes, Charles made his own bed…..

          1. Whether it was in retaliation or not, Diana still cheated; she still brought random men into her life and home and the lives and home of her sons. If a man who cheats on his family is a cold, uncaring awful father, then a woman who cheats on her family is a cold, uncaring awful mother, whether the cheating is in retaliation or not.

          2. Yeah, I’m with MMR on this one because Diana cheated too. And there is a lot of evidence Diana cheated first. And there is a lot of talk that actually they were quite fond of one another–and before she died they were reconciled and trying to parent together but he was busy with Life and Duty and she was off cavorting around the world with her lovers. Because she died, she is a saint; before she died she was a laughing-stock. Look at a lot of the pictures of them early on, Charles kissing her, pinching and grabbing her butt (it’s kinda cute in a “gross, Dad, don’t do that in public!” way).

            Diana cheated with married men. She phone-stalked the wives. Police did nothing about it when they realized the calls were from KP. That’s some sh*tty behavior. Firing nannies–then talking about “so sorry about the baby” to one of them she suspected was Charles’s lover, suggesting she had an abortion of Charles’s baby, in public–none of that is okay. Are you saying it is okay because Charles cheated on her? So Diana could cruelly ruin other people’s lives? I’m sorry, nobody gets a pass. Nobody. Charles did the wrong, awful thing by cheating. Adultery is wrong and horrible.

            Charles kept his mouth shut and has never said a bad word about Diana. Ever. Dunno how he has that kind of resolve to keep his mouth shut when she said all this horrible stuff about him, which I get yes, she is totally entitled to feeling, but she aired it to the public which was unnecessary, tacky, and cruel. Not to Charles, exactly–but the damage it did to her SONS. William was so furious and in tears.

            This is why I defend Charles so much because people always just say it’s cool for Diana to have behaved that way, when it is not acceptable. But a lot of this is swept under the rug in DianaMania and Diana herself would never admit to any fault, of course, ’cause she was /perfect/ and relied on that image. She did a lot of good things but we look at her through rose colored glasses of Saint Diana vs Evil Charles.

          3. During that horrible panorama interview, Diana is asked directly whether they were in love at the beginning of their marriage to which she responds yes. She is then asked if they were happy and she replies, ‘very much so’.

            In the recent phone tapes, she discusses her first infidelity with an RPO, Barry Manakee, which people tend to gloss over because she claims that he was murdered. Maybe he was and maybe he wasn’t, but it’s a nice deflection when you realise that affair was in 1985.

            Charles admitted that his affair with Camilla restarted in 1986.

            Diana went on to have an another affair in 1986 that has had the far reaching consequence of everyone questioning Harry’s paternity. It’s a long lived entrenched rumour that will not die despite Harry looking like a mixture of Charles, Philip and Queen Mary.

            In the Charles + mistresses saga, i’m always amused that Diana and her fans ate so fixated on Camilla when it is fact that Camilla (and most of Charles’s friends AND dog) were sidelined at the request of Diana from 1981-85ish.

            Charles, however, carried on with an entirely different woman. A woman he had been dating at the same time he was dating Camilla during the 70s. Blonde like Camilla and someone he declared was the only woman who ever understood him, so take that

            Not only was Diana aware of this other woman and her ongoing affair with Charles, she befriended her and even supported her business ventures. These 2 dresses are from the woman’s boutique. Diana wore them repeatedly.



            I suppose Camilla’s sin was having Charles fall for her after he was done with the other one, and it stuck. Diana meanwhile was galavanting to different men, none of whom were sticking. Must have been galling.

            And anyone who thinks William is particularly or even especially bothered by this saga only has to look at 2 very important aspects of his current life.

            1.Anmer Hall. This house is notoriously one of the safe houses used as a trysting place for Charles and his mistresses, particularly Camilla.

            2. This house was rented by close friends of Charles and Camilla who fully supported the affair, but were also dismissive of Diana.

            William is besties with their sons to extent that he made one of them godfather to George.

            He remains vety close to the parents.

            Andrew Morton has recently revealed that he was aware he was being used by Diana to put out her version of events because she didn’t want to be blamed at all for the breakdown of the marriage.

            It’s also been revealed that she shopped around for any author who could write as poisonous a memoir as possible as revenge.

            Since many incidents described in the book are outright lies, it’s safe to say that much of what Diana said happened to her is best taken with a giant pinch of salt.

            That doesn’t negate her hurt feelings nor am i saying that Charles was a saint, but it id time to stop dancing around the truth of Diana’s character.

            And having a bad husband is no excuse to ruin other people’s *marriages and traumatise your children as William clearly is whilst trashing the very institution you proclaim you want for your son. It is no excuse to push your stepmother down the stairs, to spread malicious gossip about your children’s caregivers.

            *it’s especially ironic that someone who declared from the rooftops her hurt that her husband cheated had no empathy for the anguish of her lovers’ wives as she did the same to them. To extent that she stalked one of the wives and only her royal privilege protected her from prosecution.

            Julia Carling was barely married before Diana became the 3rd party and Diana was lucky she died or Julia would have pushed through with her plan to name Diana in her divorce petition.

            All of this said, in her own words, told in books and those tapes, whatever Diana thought she knew about Charles before the marriage, she admits that she molded herself and strategised to get the ring. She was as bad as Kate in that respect. No matter what red flags came up, and they did, she was determined to get the ring AND oneUP her older sister for succeeding where sister had failed.

            Camilla and mistress no 2 were not a secret. Charles proposed to 2 other ladies. Twice in one case, and both turned him down because of that triangle. Older sister would also have been aware, but of course in Diana’s poisonous retelling, it was all a huge surprise.

            As her childhood nanny once told her, ‘stop telling lies diana!’

          4. I’m sorry but you can’t equate what goes on in a marriage with how one is as a parent. If there is abuse and that sort of thing then yes but having an affair does not automatically equate to being a bad parent. I don’t agree with cheating but he’s appeared to be a caring father and I don’t think he chose Camilla over his kids. And by your rationale Diana would be painted in the same brush. She too had affairs and abandoned her kids. Diana did more damage to William than Charles ever did. A parent shouldn’t confide in their young child with the things she did.
            PBS had some Diana docu the other night but I didn’t watch it
            And it’s nice to hear Harry say some nice things about Charles

          5. What Sarah said.

            Also forgot to add that during that horrid panorama interview, Diana was asked directly if Charles told the truth in his interview that he went back to Camilla in 1986 and Diana said that he told the truth.

            So people nashing about Charles carrying on with Camilla throughout the marriage have to understand the extent Diana was willing to go to embellish the truth to portray herself as a victim.

            In this case, she claims in 1992 that Camilla was always around, whilst also admitting to Andrew Morton and to that voice coach that she was obsessed with Camilla.

            Then tells a reputable BBC news programme that Charles told the truth that he went back to Camilla in 1986.

      2. There are worse things than growing up in “broken home” staying in marriage that’s bad for one thing.
        I don’t think divorce should ever be considered lightly but staying in a bad marriage is also harmful to kids. They could have remained married but have separate lives kinda thing but that is also detrimental.
        Yes, it would have been great for them to marry for love but even in the 80s in that socioeconomic group not always a done thing. I know people now who have done as more of a business type of thing. People get married for many different reasons-not always for love.
        William and Harry were both kids when Diana died so I don’t know if you can say they knew her better than anyone. Children tend to view their parents in the best light and parents also don’t (hopefully) tell their young kids all about themselves. They of course knew her better than us but they are still spinning her in a positive light and as her sons that’s to be expected and even ok.
        And of course they aren’t going to “speak evil” about their parents. 1. Diana seems to have done no wrong in their view 2. Charles pays their bills 3. The monarchy at the core is an institution that survives partly by the members not directly coming out and saying derogatory thing or airing their dirty laundry in public.

        1. My argument is that, even though the boys were very young when their mother died, they still know her AND their father better than the rest of us outsiders who are just spewing out hateful rumours that we heard from this or that person, and especially rumours that have been spread after Diana died and couldn’t defend herself. As I already mentioned, if the boys aren’t speaking any evil about any of their parents, really the rest of us outsiders should just leave it alone, because much as we might think we know all about these people, at the end of the day we really know NOTHING about what happened. Personally, I like referencing known facts and that’s why I reference Charles and Camilla affair, its a well documented fact. I referenced Diana’s affairs with multiple men, those are well documented facts. But because Diana “cheated too” doesn’t change the fact that Charles cheated on his wife and two young sons and that resulted in a break up of the home and the boys growing up (however briefly) in a broken home. A person that cheats on his family is a selfish person, they are bad parents because their desires are always placed about their own kids, period.
          Charles having had just one affair while Diana had multiple is a moot argument, facts still remain that Charles cheated FIRST. We will never know what would have been if Charles had stayed faithful to his family, but we know that his affair resulted in a broken home for his kids. But if his kids love their father, and they speak nothing evil about none of their parents, then I’m taking their cue and leaving well enough alone, I really don’t know the guy and wish all the family happiness in every thing

          1. The timeline of Camilla and Charles affair has been obsfucated not least by Diana herself. It is well documented, but Diana’s yelling it from the rooftops has blinded people to the reality and led to the altered timeline.

            And Diana herself tells the world in her panorama interview that Charles spoke the truth when he said he went back to Camilla in 1986.

            If Diana hadn’t become obsessed with Camilla as she admits in her taped conversation to Andrew Morton, she wouldn’t have provided Charles with a way to whitewash his affairs.

            In the end, it actually works out better for Charles and Camilla for people to think they were a true love’s dream thwarted by circumstance who couldn’t stay away from each other. And removes all the other players.

            Better to keep it simple than the complex tangled web of the reality even if people excoriate them for their one affair with it’s obsfucated timeline.

            Diana, Charles and Camilla grew up and belong in a world that expects fidelity long enough to have an heir and a spare, followed by discreet affairs on both sides, and no divorce. They all followed the traditional route of affairs per their upbringing and normal romantic behaviour for their set until Diana decided she didn’t want to play anymore. However, she wasn’t going to let them continue to play as well and so she threw the baby out with the bath water, but made sure to obscure her own part in the game whilst painting everyone as horrible people who victiminsed her.

  6. Access to the Windsor suite is available to anyone who can pay for the priveledge, and yes, you are picked up on the tarmac by their own security cleared cars, which possibly include an Audi. However, you do clear customs once you are inside the suite, just bypassing the long lines that you would otherwise endure. As others have said- nonstory!

    1. The Express article stated that they chose to forgo the Windsor suite due to cost, and that instead Harry is picking her up on the tarmac.

      1. Hmmm interesting. I doubt the cost factor plays into it though- I always assumed the Royals had free reign of the Windsor suite (named after them and all!) Also, wasn’t there photographs of Diana seeing away Charles on the tarmac?

        Meghan probably has frequent traveler clearance which is available through the home office and would explain the direct pickup. I don’t know why I’m nitpicking at this… apologies!

  7. There’s pictures on daily mail of her mother Doris at laundry mat interestingly though they are taken by a coleman Renner photographer which is a companie celebs and public figures use to get candid shots to sell to the press 😑

    1. Funnily enough Danielle, the article has been removed from the DM. The comments were moderated. A remark though : if she was so rich, why hasn’t she helped her family (parents) if they are so poor ? She could have bought a laundy machine set for her mom and got her father out of bankruptcy. Just sayin’.

      1. It looks to me like she’s washing bedding and such and since commercial machines are so much bigger than standard home machines, it’s easier to wash those items at a laundry mat.

        1. Last summer, my washing machine broke and I had to do my laundry at the coin laundry several times before I got my machine fixed. So things happen and it’s good that those coin laundries exist.

      2. If Meghan does not like her family for whatever reasons she has, then I understand why she wouldn’t give them money. I have many family members I dislike whom I would never give money to even if I won the lottery.

        1. It seems that she and her mother are quite close so if her mom needed anything I”m fairly certain that Meghan would help her out. As to other family members, I agree with you MMR why should she help those that she’s not close too? Plus, they’ve gone running to the press with stories that I imagine they’ve been compensated for. She might have offered to help her father with his bankruptcy but he might have turned that down, not everyone wants to take money from their children or perhaps he owed more than she could handle at that time.

          1. Her father wanted to stay in bankruptcy ?
            I’m not commenting on the others member of the family, because like you KMR (and I suspect lots of other people) I’m not close to them. But if my parents needed help, I would go out of my way to help them.

          2. My point is, that Meghan’s dad got himself into financial difficulties so it’s possible he’s the type of person who rather than ask for help decided to face the consequences of his own actions. While I know bankruptcy isn’t a great thing to go through, it’s much more common now and since he lives in Mexico it might not the hindrance it would be in the States. Plus people can get weird about money and finances, so it’s possible Meghan didn’t even know until after it was done. In my parents day, money and finances was never spoken about, let alone a parent sharing financial hardships with their children, no, no, no that just wasn’t done.

          3. Lauri I understand what you said. My point is, that we’ve been told is worth millions. That she close with her parents. So to me, it made no sense of not helping her parents who are in a difficult financial situation.

            Let’s call it a stalemate ?

    1. Me too, I came straight here when I saw it. I think we’ll have an engagement annoucement pretty soon.

      1. Me Three!!! I agree with both of you, can’t wait for MMR’s take on Meghan’s interview and I believe we’ll have an engagement announcement soon (at least I hope so!)

    2. I find it pretty stupid they go on and on about privacy and Harry releases that statement then here comes Meghan swanning in with a VF cover. I’m cynical but I really think she loves the fame and attention this whole relationship has gotten her. It’s put her to the A list.

      I hope this madness doesn’t take attention away from Invictus. Is it prep for her being there with Harry for some events? An engagement? Did Harry know of this, because if he didn’t approve, I’d imagine she’d get dumped quick and that’s not good for Meghan’s brand.

    1. I agree! She knows that without her dating a prince she would have never made it onto the cover of Vanity fair. It’s hypocritical that you get accused of being a jealous racist on certain websites if you dare to voice the tiniest bit of criticism about MM but it’s fair game to say horrible, mean-spirited things about Kate’s looks, her family, her children etc.. It’s not like MM doesn’t vacation for months in exotic location and didn’t dump her old partner as soon as something bigger came along. (Sorry for any mistakes, not a native speaker)

Comments are closed.

Back To Top