Harry & Meghan 8: Time's Most Insufferable

[louisa05]

7 hours ago, Xanariel said:

I agree that Spotify and Netflix probably didn't pay them the numbers the press reported up front. Their singular podcast episode did pretty good numbers as I recall, so Spotify was probably happy with that. Pearl has some decent figures involved, so will probably be successful once it's got off the ground. 

There's been a lot of talk that the Sussexes were aiming to model their approach after the Obamas who signed similar deals - I don't know what the Obamas' output was in the same timeframe? 

As for the recent news, I don't think Meghan intends to become a politician. She is obviously pretty protective of her family's privacy and I can't see her wanting to give the Republicans carte blanche to dig through their history. 

I assume she's again maybe looking to model herself after the Obamas - a force who isn't necessarily holding a political position herself, but whose voice has a lot of sway and who helps bring together groups to get vital legislation passed when she thinks it's necessary. 

Michelle: 12 episodes of podcast in 8 months from August 2020 to April of this year. Barack: 8 episodes of joint podcast with Bruce Springsteen from February to April this year. 
For Netflix they have produced two documentaries and one children’s series and several other projects are in production. List at this link. https://www.oprahdaily.com/entertainment/tv-movies/a27323589/barack-michelle-obama-list-netflix-shows/
 

[just_ordinary]

16 hours ago, Xanariel said:

I agree that Spotify and Netflix probably didn't pay them the numbers the press reported up front. Their singular podcast episode did pretty good numbers as I recall, so Spotify was probably happy with that. Pearl has some decent figures involved, so will probably be successful once it's got off the ground. 

There's been a lot of talk that the Sussexes were aiming to model their approach after the Obamas who signed similar deals - I don't know what the Obamas' output was in the same timeframe? 

As for the recent news, I don't think Meghan intends to become a politician. She is obviously pretty protective of her family's privacy and I can't see her wanting to give the Republicans carte blanche to dig through their history. 

I assume she's again maybe looking to model herself after the Obamas - a force who isn't necessarily holding a political position herself, but whose voice has a lot of sway and who helps bring together groups to get vital legislation passed when she thinks it's necessary. 

Problem is: the Obamas did stuff to earn their profile. They didn’t just relax on Barack holding the office twice too. Michelle build her own profile with her own projects as First Lady and both continued to be present and showed a pretty balanced and not hysterical approach to the topics they champion. Iirc some minority and/or discriminated groups think they were to soft in their issues. I won’t judge on that, because I can don’t live in the US so can only try to understand the issues from afar (and don’t understand some at all). But I do think the more soft approach makes them agreeable and respectable to a bigger amount of people and therefore maybe have more influence than more extrem positions. 
They also never ran around crying they were hurting for money (and running for president does affect the candidates personal finances sometimes doesn’t it?) or how hard it was done by them, while sitting on big privileges. 

The appeal of the DM (or rather the underlying news group) has started. They brought in some text messages from her father that are not exactly reflecting her version of events. I think they might still loose because if the ownership of the letter was legally still hers, there is not much to argue about. But by having the stage to dig up and present all of this, they definitely hurt her narrative. Still think, dropping her family was a fair decision, if you look at how they behaved- even her father. He could have been hurt and angry, even tell his version of events and then gracefully shut up. I would question her if so. But he decided to put his foot in again and again.

[Xanariel]

1 hour ago, just_ordinary said:

Problem is: the Obamas did stuff to earn their profile. They didn’t just relax on Barack holding the office twice too. Michelle build her own profile with her own projects as First Lady and both continued to be present and showed a pretty balanced and not hysterical approach to the topics they champion. Iirc some minority and/or discriminated groups think they were to soft in their issues. I won’t judge on that, because I can don’t live in the US so can only try to understand the issues from afar (and don’t understand some at all). But I do think the more soft approach makes them agreeable and respectable to a bigger amount of people and therefore maybe have more influence than more extrem positions. 
They also never ran around crying they were hurting for money (and running for president does affect the candidates personal finances sometimes doesn’t it?) or how hard it was done by them, while sitting on big privileges. 

The appeal of the DM (or rather the underlying news group) has started. They brought in some text messages from her father that are not exactly reflecting her version of events. I think they might still loose because if the ownership of the letter was legally still hers, there is not much to argue about. But by having the stage to dig up and present all of this, they definitely hurt her narrative. Still think, dropping her family was a fair decision, if you look at how they behaved- even her father. He could have been hurt and angry, even tell his version of events and then gracefully shut up. I would question her if so. But he decided to put his foot in again and again.

Yeah, I don't blame Meghan at all for shutting out her father. It looks like she and Harry did try (the texts Harry sent suggest that they initially thought Thomas was just naive/in over his head with the press - it must have come as an unpleasant shock when they realised that he was actively weaponising his interviews). 

As for the Obamas...yes, I think the issue is that the Obamas obviously are political. They've got a lot of respect across the population, but the whole statesman role they've got is based on their public profile as conducted in the US political arena. 

Whereas Harry and Meghan...I dunno, they seem to want to have that kind of gravitas, or that of a major activist celebrity like Leonardo Di Caprio or Dolly Parton. But unlike any of those people, their fame is built off being former BRF members. 

Though in all fairness, Diana received criticism for her activism too (like the land-mines). I'm not sure I'm aware of her directly lobbying politicians though, especially not ringing them saying "Hi, it's Diana, Princess of Wales here". 

If Americans are fine with it, it isn't my business. They don't have the formal position in the US that they did in the UK, so the optics aren't as horrendous as it would be if Kate was ringing up politicians (even if it was for a "humanitarian" reason as Meghan describes it). 

But I really think they should drop their titles if they're getting involved in politics. I don't think Meghan really got why royals aren't meant to get involved in politics, given that whole waffle about Harry never having the chance to vote. 

Edited November 10, 2021 by Xanariel

[LilaMae]

There is currently an appeal going on. Meghan won a victory against Associated Newspapers a while ago, but the appeal has been going on since yesterday and a lot has been coming out. 

Jason Knauf, who worked for Harry and Meghan, has told the court the following (and emails/texts have been submitted in evidence).

* Harry and Meghan were extensively involved in their biography "Finding Freedom", which they previously denied. Meghan sent at least one long email with a ton of background information. She previously lied in court about her involvement.

* Meghan wrote a letter to her father that was leaked to the press. She originally said that she had no idea this would happen. However, she discusses the possibility of the leak with Knauf, and deliberately numbers pages and cuts off sentences so that the letter would have to be published in full if it was leaked. She also spoke to Knauf about introducing the letter with "Dear Daddy", because she thought if it was leaked it would tug at the public's heartstrings.

* The court apparently has access to texts that were sent by Thomas Markle to Meghan in the couple of weeks leading up to the wedding. Meghan had previously stated that Thomas was refusing to answer her calls and texts. (Extract from Daily Mail article):

"In one from May 11, eight days before the wedding, Mr Markle told his daughter: ‘I’m getting excited, it’s all so close now, I can’t wait to walk you down the aisle.’

When he was hospitalised in the week before the wedding, he wrote: ‘Sorry about this. Love you guys.’

On May 16, he wrote to his daughter: ‘Surgery went OK. Heart attack did some damage. But the doctor won’t allow me to fly so of course I’m sorry I can’t come. Love you and wish you the best of everything.’

The next day he sent a message asking: ‘Who will give you away? I will come if you really need me. I’m sorry about this.’"

 

Even if Meghan wins again, it will be a somewhat Pyrrhic victory. All this evidence doesn't exactly show her in a great light.

[just_ordinary]

12 minutes ago, LilaMae said:

There is currently an appeal going on. Meghan won a victory against Associated Newspapers a while ago, but the appeal has been going on since yesterday and a lot has been coming out. 

Jason Knauf, who worked for Harry and Meghan, has told the court the following (and emails/texts have been submitted in evidence).

* Harry and Meghan were extensively involved in their biography "Finding Freedom", which they previously denied. Meghan sent at least one long email with a ton of background information. She previously lied in court about her involvement.

* Meghan wrote a letter to her father that was leaked to the press. She originally said that she had no idea this would happen. However, she discusses the possibility of the leak with Knauf, and deliberately numbers pages and cuts off sentences so that the letter would have to be published in full if it was leaked. She also spoke to Knauf about introducing the letter with "Dear Daddy", because she thought if it was leaked it would tug at the public's heartstrings.

* The court apparently has access to texts that were sent by Thomas Markle to Meghan in the couple of weeks leading up to the wedding. Meghan had previously stated that Thomas was refusing to answer her calls and texts. (Extract from Daily Mail article):

"In one from May 11, eight days before the wedding, Mr Markle told his daughter: ‘I’m getting excited, it’s all so close now, I can’t wait to walk you down the aisle.’

When he was hospitalised in the week before the wedding, he wrote: ‘Sorry about this. Love you guys.’

On May 16, he wrote to his daughter: ‘Surgery went OK. Heart attack did some damage. But the doctor won’t allow me to fly so of course I’m sorry I can’t come. Love you and wish you the best of everything.’

The next day he sent a message asking: ‘Who will give you away? I will come if you really need me. I’m sorry about this.’"

 

Even if Meghan wins again, it will be a somewhat Pyrrhic victory. All this evidence doesn't exactly show her in a great light.

That was definitely not a good day for her. ANL will very probably not win this appeal because of how the legal situation about the copyright infringement is BUT I think they knew, but used this opportunity explicitly to drag her through the mud she created herself. She has won the fight, but it seems she will loose this war.

I am most annoyed about her “apology”. No f*****g way she “forgot” their involvement in FF. They didn’t obtain that statement on the spot but she and her lawyers prepared for months for this. It’s complete BS. I think she didn’t believe JK would keep those mails, or would still be employed by the RF and therefore gagged to a certain degree.

And of course, not it’s not her/their fault but the fault of unnamed Royals A&B. Even though they advised her to talk to TM directly and never to write a letter. But it’s not their fault. It never is.

Edited November 10, 2021 by just_ordinary

[LilaMae]

4 minutes ago, just_ordinary said:

That was definitely not a good day for her. ANL will very probably not win this appeal because of how the legal situation about the copyright infringement is BUT I think they knew, but used this opportunity explicitly to drag her through the mud she created herself. She has won the fight, but it seems she will loose this war.

I am most annoyed about her “apology”. No f*****g way she “forgot” their involvement in FF. They didn’t obtain that statement on the spot but she and her lawyers prepared for months for this. It’s complete BS. I think she didn’t believe JK would keep those mails, or would still be employed by the RF and therefore gagged to a certain degree.

And of course, not it’s not her/their fault but the fault of unnamed Royals A&B. Even though they advised her to talk to TM directly and never to write a letter. But it’s not their fault. It never is.

Definitely lying. It was a long email she wrote, and Harry sent an email or two himself about the same subject. It wouldn't have been something they'd forget about.

[Xanariel]

Yeesh, the fact that Meghan lied - and for what? - to the court about her involvement in Finding Freedom was so baffling. It was blindingly obvious that she had assisted with it, and she wouldn't have been the first royal to help with a biography of themselves. 

But this definitely makes me intensely suspicious of her account of Kate making her cry. In this book, that she was heavily involved in to get the truth out, it was explicitly said that there were "no tears" (despite the fact that there were several reports which differed as to the cause but all agreed that Meghan made Kate cry). 

Yet all of a sudden, the story changes and Kate made Meghan cry? Despite royal journalists noting all their sources are still insisting that not only were there definitely tears but that it was definitely Kate who was upset? 

Recollections may vary indeed. 

Edited November 10, 2021 by Xanariel

[LilaMae]

In an ironic twist, Prince Harry was just on a panel about misinformation:

"Misinformation is a global humanitarian crisis," Prince Harry said during the panel, which focused in particular on tech companies like Facebook and Twitter. "I've felt it personally over the years, and now I’m watching it happen globally. The scariest part about it is you don’t need to be online to be affected by it. It’s important to recognize that this problem did not originate on social media. I learned from a very early age that the incentives of publishing are not necessarily aligned with the incentives of truth."

Perhaps he needs to have a chat with his wife about it since she is currently experiencing such a crisis of misinformation herself?

[viii]

Ohhhh man. Not a great day for Meghan. She's more calculating than I originally thought. What a mess. 

[tabitha2]

She thinks she is way smarter and way more influential than she is. Ain’t no Republican women senators care what you think Meghan! 

[MamaJunebug]

7 hours ago, LilaMae said:

In an ironic twist, Prince Harry was just on a panel about misinformation:

"Misinformation is a global humanitarian crisis," Prince Harry said during the panel, which focused in particular on tech companies like Facebook and Twitter. "I've felt it personally over the years, and now I’m watching it happen globally. The scariest part about it is you don’t need to be online to be affected by it. It’s important to recognize that this problem did not originate on social media. I learned from a very early age that the incentives of publishing are not necessarily aligned with the incentives of truth."

Perhaps he needs to have a chat with his wife about it since she is currently experiencing such a crisis of misinformation herself?

Just came across an article about Harry’s participation in a panel discussion of all things SM. Harry warned of 1/6/21

My 12-year-old boy’s brain took over when I got to the part about him not liking the term “Megxit,” and the author’s suggestion that it might have better been Susexit. 

12-year-old boy MJB thought of the much simpler “Suxit,” which in my humble serf’s opinion, these two do. I really hope they don’t  get much traction in their attempts to become leaders of any sort. Don’t think they’re up to it. 

Edited November 11, 2021 by MamaJunebug

[louisa05]

On 11/9/2021 at 9:49 AM, viii said:

Agreed - I don't think she's aiming for politics at all. There's far too much to dig up there. 

I don’t think she’s wanting to run for anything either. But people digging into her past isn’t the reason. I get the sense that she thinks she’s always above reproach and anything sketchy is someone else’s fault. She can just make excuses. Witness yesterday’s debacle in court: she didn’t lie. She just “failed to remember”. 

[MomJeans]

I don't want to think ill of Megan (honestly, truly, and I agree that the publishing of the letter violated U.K. copyright laws).  But  . . . I'm struggling to see how she simply forgot she helped the authors of Finding Freedom.   This wasn't a 3 minute conversation that happened by chance on the streets of London on her way to a party, and forgotten moments later. This appears to be carefully coordinated and calculated, and if so, was likely done over the course of weeks. 

I'm curious as to whether her attorneys encouraged the (alleged) false information, or were caught completely unaware yesterday.  Of course, we will never know. but this stains them as well, no matter what.

It wasn't even germane to her case.  Such an (alleged) serious lapse in judgment for no real reason.  Her claim was always going to hinge on copyright, more than protecting her privacy.  Anyone who followed her and Harry knew they likely gave info to Scobie.  Admitted it would have cost them nothing.

 

Edited November 11, 2021 by MomJeans
pressed save too soon, words changed.

[just_ordinary]

On 11/11/2021 at 6:46 PM, MomJeans said:

I don't want to think ill of Megan (honestly, truly, and I agree that the publishing of the letter violated U.K. copyright laws).  But  . . . I'm struggling to see how she simply forgot she helped the authors of Finding Freedom.   This wasn't a 3 minute conversation that happened by chance on the streets of London on her way to a party, and forgotten moments later. This appears to be carefully coordinated and calculated, and if so, was likely done over the course of weeks. 

I'm curious as to whether her attorneys encouraged the (alleged) false information, or were caught completely unaware yesterday.  Of course, we will never know. but this stains them as well, no matter what.

It wasn't even germane to her case.  Such an (alleged) serious lapse in judgment for no real reason.  Her claim was always going to hinge on copyright, more than protecting her privacy.  Anyone who followed her and Harry knew they likely gave info to Scobie.  Admitted it would have cost them nothing.

 

Especially as her involvement (that was clear as day) with FF has absolutely no impact on the case at all. Neither the People article nor FF directly printed parts of the letter. It was always paraphrased second hand account which was probably obtained by talking about it (at least you can not prove she handed out copies). ANL had to admit that TM could have taken a statement against the parts of the claims that were out there without their direct quotes. They could have paraphrased, he could have in his statement. There was simply no need to print parts of it. 
I mean, her sueing about it was stupid from the start, because it wasn’t important if they had parts directly quoted or not. Yes, she can win this but it’s about copyright infringement and privacy but not about what they did with it. It’s not a case about, how the media is out to get her. That’s not what the court is deciding on. It’s a mere technicality. She will very probably win, as the law is on her side from my point of view, but with this appeal she has lost tons of credibility and for nothing. And dragged H in with her as well. Only difference, he didn’t provide this lie as a statement to the court.

[nelliebelle1197]

On 11/9/2021 at 10:36 AM, Xanariel said:

I agree that Spotify and Netflix probably didn't pay them the numbers the press reported up front. Their singular podcast episode did pretty good numbers as I recall, so Spotify was probably happy with that. Pearl has some decent figures involved, so will probably be successful once it's got off the ground. 

There's been a lot of talk that the Sussexes were aiming to model their approach after the Obamas who signed similar deals - I don't know what the Obamas' output was in the same timeframe? 

As for the recent news, I don't think Meghan intends to become a politician. She is obviously pretty protective of her family's privacy and I can't see her wanting to give the Republicans carte blanche to dig through their history. 

I assume she's again maybe looking to model herself after the Obamas - a force who isn't necessarily holding a political position herself, but whose voice has a lot of sway and who helps bring together groups to get vital legislation passed when she thinks it's necessary. 

But the Obamas actually have ACCOMPLISHMENTS besides marrying an Englishman with a title.

[EmCatlyn]

Quote

The catalyst for my doing this is seeing how much pain this is causing H," Meghan said via text in August 2018, using her pet name for Prince Harry. "Even after a week with his dad [Prince Charles] and endlessly explaining the situation, his family seem to forget the context — and revert to 'can't she just go and see him and make this stop?'"

The Duchess of Sussex continued, "They fundamentally don't understand so at least by writing H will be able to say to his family… 'She wrote him a letter and he is still doing it.' By taking this form of action I protect my husband from this constant berating, and while unlikely perhaps it will give my father a moment to pause.'"

People, Nov 12, 2021 

The latest spin on Meghan’s letter to her father is that she only wrote it because the RF was “berating” Harry about her not making peace with her father.  So, you see, it’s not Meghan’s fault.

One of the resulting headlines,  from Complex.com  statesthat  “Texts Released in Court Reveal Royal Family 'Berated' Prince Harry Over Meghan Markle's Relationship With Her Dad.”  I think this is (like many headlines) misleading.  The texts only reveal that Meghan claims that the RF “berated,” Harry. 😉

Although I totally sympathize with Meghan’s impatience and embarrassment resulting from the way her father was behaving, I have to wonder if she didn’t make things worse by not reacting differently.  It does not surprise me that the RF put some pressure on Harry to get her to do something to put out the fire.  I would have also.

Basically, I don’t understand why she didn’t reach out more to her father after he was hospitalized. He had made a stupid mistake.  He had done something she had told him not to do. He was still her father in the hospital.  Afterwards, when he started publicly complaining that she had ignored and abandoned him, she could have phoned and tried to work something out. It does not appear that she did so.

In the light of the way H and M behaved after they left the RF, there is too much of a sense that relationships for Meghan are “my way or the highway.”

🤷‍♀️

 

 

[Coconut Flan]

26 minutes ago, EmCatlyn said:

Although I totally sympathize with Meghan’s impatience and embarrassment resulting from the way her father was behaving, I have to wonder if she didn’t make things worse by not reacting differently.  It does not surprise me that the RF put some pressure on Harry to get her to do something to put out the fire.  I would have also.

Basically, I don’t understand why she didn’t reach out more to her father after he was hospitalized. He had made a stupid mistake.  He had done something she had told him not to do. He was still her father in the hospital.  Afterwards, when he started publicly complaining that she had ignored and abandoned him, she could have phoned and tried to work something out. It does not appear that she did so.

There were a lot of people both in the UK and the US who said at the time, why didn't she go see her father and work something out face to face?  It would have been a pain right before the wedding, but if anyone had the resources to make it work, it would be the BRF.  I can see why Prince Charles or other people might suggest it.  Given how overly sensitive both H and M have come across, one mention might be enough for one of them to translate to being pressured.  

I've never found texting to be the way to resolve sibling issues with my kids and I doubt any of my kids would think texting would be the way to resolve an issue with me.   In fact, planning for my surgery they even tried to do as much of that in person as they could and if not that on Facetime.  You don't use impersonal means to work on personal problems if you have a real relationship with the person involved at least not in our family.   

[DalmatianCat]

“Berating” was Meghan’s word but Charles asking Harry, “Can’t she go see him and make him stop?” is not berating at all.
Berating is telling Harry, “Why did you choose someone with such a messed up family? You’re an imbecile.”

”Can she do something about it?” is a fair question (if you have a soon-to-be in-law making embarrassing headlines I think most family members would at some point vocally wonder what could be done).

If Harry had just told his dad, “No, there’s nothing she can do. Her dad is ridiculous, they have no relationship,” that may have at least been good enough for his family. The fact that Meghan settled on a letter (that she assumed would be leaked) so Harry could “tell his dad she had done something,” seems like an unnecessarily round-about way to answer Charles’ direct question. Why not just tell Charles…”I don’t know what to do about my dad, but he’ll probably always cause some sort of drama. Send the Royal hush people after him!” Surely that’s a thing??? They kept plenty of Harry’s scandals relatively quiet.

I’m confused by the “After spending a week with his dad trying to explain things” part. Where was that in the timeline of events leading up the wedding?
After the (wisely) quiet Middleton family, the royal family seemed underprepared for a new set of in-laws…which does lend itself to the whole relationship being rushed/taking everyone by surprise.

Edited November 15, 2021 by DalmatianCat
Clarity

[EmCatlyn]

8 minutes ago, DalmatianCat said:

”Can she do something about it?” is a fair question (if you have a soon-to-be in-law making embarrassing headlines I think most family members would at some point vocally wonder what could be done).

I believe the letter was written and sent after the wedding.  Whatever Prince Charles or anyone else was saying to Harry, it was probably after the honeymoon.  If I remember correctly, Thomas Markle was in the hospital right before the wedding.  He had not done anything worse than the staging of the paparazzi photos.  There are different narratives about whether he was trying to communicate with Meghan during the period between the paparazzi embarrassment and her wedding.  However, it isn’t until after the wedding that he surfaces with his “My daughter has rejected me,” interviews which, presumably, are what led to Meghan’s letter.

That she wrote a letter at that point doesn’t surprise me because I come from a family that wrote letters as a prelude to face-to-face or phone discussions.  If I had written a “deeply-felt” letter about a problem between us to my mother, she would have read it and picked up the phone to talk (and vice-versa).  

What does surprise me is that before the wedding, when her father was supposedly in the hospital with a heart attack (or reasonable facsimile) she did not immediately drop the “feud” about the paparazzi thing and reach out to him.  Heck, she could send flowers, a get-well card, etc. if she was too busy to make a phone call (which she may have been, preparing for the wedding and in a different time-zone).  Maybe if she had reached out to him, her father might have refrained from some of the interviews he gave after the wedding.  But even if he hadn’t, she would had done what seems to me the normal thing.

What is most striking about Meghan is that no matter what she is doing or saying there is always a performative edge to it.  Even a letter to her father becomes a performance: first, she performs to the people with whom she shares the writing of the letter (she is doing it to protect Harry, she expects it to be leaked, she is writing it very carefully), then she performs the letter itself to her father, and finally (after the letter is leaked) she performs to the media (she is hurt, her privacy violated, etc.) and the legal courts.

Interestingly, the whole point of her performances seems to be to control whatever narrative she is a part of.  The bits I’ve seen of the letter are cleverly crafted to put her story out her way. 

 

[just_ordinary]

The BRF has quite the experience with embarrassing family members (original or through marriage). You would think that their expertise is much welcome. Even though they sometimes show quite idiotic approaches. But no, she alone knew what was best. 
I mean, they never met Thomas, she never seemed to have talked to him a lot over the years as they were already estranged so why did she think she was the expert? And what, if journalists would have flodded town when they showed up to meet him (with the BRF lawyer to gag him for good?)? They talked to everyone and their dog in Kates home town. 
They just didn’t like the advice they got. What also shows, that their narrative of being left on their own is exaggerated as well. It just wasn’t the help and input they wanted.

Reading her words I am also starting to wonder why TM was ever invited? I thought their relationship was distant but amicable, but it seems it was pretty icy and practically non-existent. Both didn’t lift a finger to restore it before. There was no work to rekindle after she met Harry, they got serious and engaged. So I don’t understand why she even wanted him there? Just for the photos, to not engage with him afterwards? Or to have him just present for those special events  every couple of years? But if so you would put a bit more effort into it? And it was just to appease- why not be more proactive? Meet up, play nice, let him sign all sorts of NDA’s to shut him up. You can still freeze him out from there…..

[EmCatlyn]

8 hours ago, just_ordinary said:

The BRF has quite the experience with embarrassing family members (original or through marriage). You would think that their expertise is much welcome. Even though they sometimes show quite idiotic approaches. But no, she alone knew what was best. 
I mean, they never met Thomas, she never seemed to have talked to him a lot over the years as they were already estranged so why did she think she was the expert? And what, if journalists would have flodded town when they showed up to meet him (with the BRF lawyer to gag him for good?)? They talked to everyone and their dog in Kates home town. 
They just didn’t like the advice they got. What also shows, that their narrative of being left on their own is exaggerated as well. It just wasn’t the help and input they wanted.

Reading her words I am also starting to wonder why TM was ever invited? I thought their relationship was distant but amicable, but it seems it was pretty icy and practically non-existent. Both didn’t lift a finger to restore it before. There was no work to rekindle after she met Harry, they got serious and engaged. So I don’t understand why she even wanted him there? Just for the photos, to not engage with him afterwards? Or to have him just present for those special events  every couple of years? But if so you would put a bit more effort into it? And it was just to appease- why not be more proactive? Meet up, play nice, let him sign all sorts of NDA’s to shut him up. You can still freeze him out from there…..

He wasn’t just invited.  He was expected to walk her down the aisle.  I don’t know if their relationship before her engagement to Harry was entirely “icy and pretty non-existent” or if they were alternating between “amicable stretches” and “icy stretches” in their relationship.  I believe she sent him money at some point, which could be part of the issue: he may have wanted more, or he may have been embarrassed to “need” her help and/or she may not have been graceful about giving the help.  

I agree that it appears she didn’t ask for advice or listen for feedback from the BRF and their staff.  She seems to have made up her mind that the best thing was to completely shut out her father. The letter was just a way to justify herself, not a real “reaching out” that might have led to peace.

A part of me sympathizes with her.  It must have been very difficult to have to deal with all this (an embarrassing father, a hostile press, in-laws she wasn’t comfortable with, the whole “royal” culture, etc.) while also getting ready for a huge wedding that would be watched around the world. However, I remain amazed that she didn’t do anything to reach out to her father when she heard he was ill.  It almost seems as if she blamed him for having a heart attack at such an inconvenient time. (Even if she suspected he was exaggerating his illness, she should have made some gesture of concern.)

The picture I get is that she really has difficulty seeing things from any point of view but her own.  So long as she and Harry continue to see eye-to-eye on most things, that’s probably okay.  I wonder, however, how it may be when his self-centeredness and hers clash. 😉

[just_ordinary]

56 minutes ago, EmCatlyn said:

He wasn’t just invited.  He was expected to walk her down the aisle.  I don’t know if their relationship before her engagement to Harry was entirely “icy and pretty non-existent” or if they were alternating between “amicable stretches” and “icy stretches” in their relationship.  I believe she sent him money at some point, which could be part of the issue: he may have wanted more, or he may have been embarrassed to “need” her help and/or she may not have been graceful about giving the help.  

I agree that it appears she didn’t ask for advice or listen for feedback from the BRF and their staff.  She seems to have made up her mind that the best thing was to completely shut out her father. The letter was just a way to justify herself, not a real “reaching out” that might have led to peace.

A part of me sympathizes with her.  It must have been very difficult to have to deal with all this (an embarrassing father, a hostile press, in-laws she wasn’t comfortable with, the whole “royal” culture, etc.) while also getting ready for a huge wedding that would be watched around the world. However, I remain amazed that she didn’t do anything to reach out to her father when she heard he was ill.  It almost seems as if she blamed him for having a heart attack at such an inconvenient time. (Even if she suspected he was exaggerating his illness, she should have made some gesture of concern.)

The picture I get is that she really has difficulty seeing things from any point of view but her own.  So long as she and Harry continue to see eye-to-eye on most things, that’s probably okay.  I wonder, however, how it may be when his self-centeredness and hers clash. 😉

BIB that’s a very reasonable interpretation that I can absolutely get behind. Would you agree though, that they were in an icy stretch when she and H became a thing and obviously never recovered?

The thing is, I would understand if she had decided to shut him out. But she didn’t. He was never un-invited but pulled out himself. I mean after he went into hospital there wasn’t much she could have done as it would have looked absolutely heartless. But she also didn’t try the PR game and sent a get well card and flowers. It was a bit of a half and half situation. I get why she maybe just didn’t want to make a decision either way (giving in or freezing out). Many tricky relationships can only survive because you found ways to ignore or avoid lots of stuff. But marrying into this family, it was a given every bit of mud under your boot would be dragged up. Kate was lucky she was so young and sheltered. There wasn’t much time to accomplish lots of skeletons in the closet. 
Didn’t she and H talk? Did he have no idea how thing were for her and what the stance of the family business was? In the end the BRF was right. Thomas came back and bit them in the arse. There should have been a clear stance the second it became clear they wouldn’t rekindle. Not writing letters like this. I do feel sorry for her though. It’s a shitty situation and must hurt and I don’t think anyone deserves to be treated like that publicly by the people that are your family (not counting the half siblings. They are shitty too but it doesn’t seem she expected anything different from them). But then, she turns around and used the same techniques against the BRF…. 

[MomJeans]

I think the Royal family likely did put pressure on Harry to get Thomas and Samantha out of the headlines, because, that's part of being an full-time royal.  Is it fair? Hell no, but it's a part of the role.  (And Carole Middleton was reportedly humiliated by what the press dug up about her own family, and even, allegedly, apologized to William and Charles about it, that her family was the weak link.)

My complete guess: I think the royal family came down hard, because they hadn't been getting a straight story (possibly) from H&M, and from the family's perspective, a decisive path needed to be taken.  From their perspective, they were likely caught completely unaware, which they hate *though you think they would be used to it by now*.  At first it was Meghan had no family.  Then it was - oh she only has two parents, they won't speak to the press, and her dad can't wait to walk her down the aisle.  Then it was a stream of Markles out of no where, all running to the tabloids.  Followed by Meghan's father was throwing a tantrum to TMZ five days before the wedding.

So I can see why the royal family would suddenly demand to that she go meet him in person and get it sorted (not on his doorstep, but at a private location in San Diego/Del Mar.)  And to be honest, if the only goal was to end the media circus, it was probably excellent advice.  I don't think Thomas in any way deserved such an olive branch, but that wasn't the purpose from the royal family's POV. 

Now, I do think Meghan has the absolute right to set boundaries, so I don't think she had to meet with Thomas.   Kind of like suing the DM, it's her choice and right, but there's a valid reason the royal family does what it does- from their POV, ending bad headlines can be sometimes more important than asserting rights.

 

[EmCatlyn]

3 hours ago, just_ordinary said:

…..

But then, she turns around and used the same techniques against the BRF…. 

Yeah, talk about irony!

It really seems that Meghan’s behavior is just a slightly classier version of what her father and siblings have been doing.  

[Coconut Flan]

30 minutes ago, MomJeans said:

Kind of like suing the DM, it's her choice and right, but there's a valid reason the royal family does what it does- from their POV, ending bad headlines can be sometimes more important than asserting rights.

Assuredly and to quote an old saw do you want to be right or do you want to be happy?