Monday, March 8, 2021

UNDERSTANDING MEGHAN MARKLE, BITCH ON A ROLL

 THIS APTLY SUMS UP MEGHAN MARKLE


Markle’s attorneys have claimed she was unaware of reports about the Crown Prince’s alleged involvement in Khashoggi’s murder though Royal Palace aides who spoke anonymously said the Duchess was warned not to wear the earrings but did so anyway.

Meghan Markle openly accuses the Royals of racism

I'm probably second to none in my dislike for Meghan Markle.  There's something unattractive about a mature woman marrying into the British royal family with one of the world's most expensive weddings, hanging out with the queen, living in insane luxury...and then whining nonstop about the horror of her life.  There's something even less appealing when that woman accuses the royal family of race-hatred.  And the problem is that, when it comes to that left-wing diva, Meghan Markle, it's hard to believe most of what she says.

After weeks of hype, CBS finally televised Meghan Markle's and Prince Harry's interview with Oprah.  Have I mentioned that I can't stand Oprah, either?  I think it's admirable how she's become one of the richest women in the world.  Nevertheless, I think her decades-long, hugely successful emphasis on emotions over reason is part of the problem with America today.  The left feeds on people who cannot reason but, instead, filter everything through their closely scrutinized navels.  It's all feelings, no facts, and, as we've seen in the last year, it's dangerous.

As you can imagine, between being a busy person and having nothing but disdain for both Meghan and Oprah, I didn't watch the interview.  However, I could scarcely avoid the fact that Meghan's big bombshell was her claim that the royal family's decision to deny baby Archie a royal title was due to racism:

Meghan Markle has tearfully told Oprah Winfrey she was suicidal when she was five months pregnant and accused Kate Middleton of making her cry in today's bombshell interview before the couple informed tens of millions of people watching they are having a baby girl, revealed the deep rift with Prince Charles and accused the Royal Family of racism.

[snip]

Meghan also sensationally claimed that a relative of Harry asked him 'how dark' their unborn child would be with the Duchess claiming Archie being mixed-race was a 'problem' for the royals after Oprah asked her if they were worried their son was 'too brown'. 

The former Suits star said she would not name the person because it would be 'too damaging' for them. But she confirmed that the duke was asked the question — 'how dark his skin might be when he's born' — 'by family'. Harry was also asked to identify the culprit but said he didn't feel 'comfortable' discussing it.

Given the scrutiny the royal family experienced thanks to Diana, and the delicacy of navigating Meghan's mildly black heritage when she was engaged and then married to Harry, who thinks anyone of note in the family was stupid enough to ask that question?  Perhaps a dotty old aunt, encrusted in pre-WWII racial sensibilities, might have said something so foolish, but did anyone else really think to make such a racist comment regarding manipulative Meghan's baby?

Meghan also claimed that she had no say in the matter — yet royal tradition suggests the opposite is true.  Back in May 2019, when Archie was born, the media noted that the child, who is seventh in line to the throne didn't seem to have a title.  The explanation was obvious — this was what Harry and Meghan wanted:

If the palace confirms that Archie will not be known as an earl, it means one thing: The Duke and Duchess wanted it that way. "This is just their attitude that they want a normal life for their children," Koenig tells TIME.

If he's to be known as just Archie, and not Archie, Earl of Dumbarton — which is his father's subsidiary (honorary) title — it's another signal that his parents are going to uphold the family's privacy.

Now the closest to the throne in the male line without a title, it's likely that Archie, who is seventh in line to the crown, will never have royal engagements, duties or patronages, Koenig says. Even though Queen Elizabeth II is the matriarch and leader of the family, this wasn't her decision.

Other royals have made the same choice.  "Princess Anne, Queen Elizabeth's daughter, opted for her children not to hold the titles they could have had[.]"  Nobody ever questioned the color of those children.  

The same article points out that, in the lead-up to Archie's birth, Meghan and Harry had shown a mania for privacy, including having the baby's delivery kept secret.  Moreover, when he was just dating Meghan, Harry had stated, "I am determined to have a relatively normal life, and if I am lucky enough to have children, they can have one too."

Meghan has proven to be a classic leftist: self-centered, ruled by emotion, greedy, resentful of obligations that don't have an immediate benefit for her, race-obsessed, and whiny.  The ancient British royal family made a strong public show of welcoming her, and she spat in their faces.  So pardon me if I think the claim about Archie is just another false narrative in Meghan Markle's personal drama.

Meghan Markle Accused of Wearing ‘Blood Money’ Earrings from Saudi Crown Prince

SUVA, FIJI - OCTOBER 23: Meghan, Duchess of Sussex attends the State dinner on October 23, 2018 in Suva, Fiji. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are on their official 16-day Autumn tour visiting cities in Australia, Fiji, Tonga and New Zealand. (Photo by Ian Vogler - Pool/Getty Images)
Ian Vogler - Pool/Getty Images
1:53

Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, is being accused of wearing “blood money” earrings that were gifted to her from Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

In a Daily Mail report, attorney Michael Eisner said he was “baffled” when he saw Markle wearing the chandelier earrings at an October 2018 state dinner in Fiji. Markle also wore the earrings to a birthday party for Prince Charles, the Prince of Wales.

The earrings, Eisner said, were given to Queen Elizabeth II by the Crown Prince as a gift for Markle following her wedding to Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, in March 2018.

Days before the Fiji state dinner, Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi was allegedly murdered in a brutal killing where his body was dismembered in the Instabul, Turkey consulate. Since his murder, reports have circulated around the Crown Prince that he had Khashoggi murdered.

“Those earrings were bought with blood money and given to her by a murderer,” Eisner said. “She has no business wearing them.”

Meghan, Duchess of Sussex attends the State dinner on October 23, 2018 in Suva, Fiji. (Ian Vogler – Pool/Getty Images)

Meghan, Duchess of Sussex arrives for the State dinner on October 23, 2018 in Suva, Fiji. (Ian Vogler – Pool/Getty Images)

report from United States intelligence agencies released last month accuses the Crown Prince of having likely ordered the murder of Khashoggi.

Eisner, who leads a human rights group founded by Khashoggi months before his killing, blasted Markle in an interview with the Daily Mail for wearing the earrings:

“It’s baffling that she would not know the circumstances surrounding Khashoggi’s murder and understand that [the Crown Prince] had blood on his hands,” Eisner said.

Markle’s attorneys have claimed she was unaware of reports about the Crown Prince’s alleged involvement in Khashoggi’s murder though Royal Palace aides who spoke anonymously said the Duchess was warned not to wear the earrings but did so anyway.

John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Email him at jbinder@breitbart.com. Follow him on Twitter here


Fashion Notes: The Missing Drama of Meghan Markle’s Dramatic Tell-All

UNSPECIFIED - UNSPECIFIED: In this handout image provided by Harpo Productions and released on March 5, 2021, Oprah Winfrey interviews Prince Harry and Meghan Markle on A CBS Primetime Special premiering on CBS on March 7, 2021. (Photo by Harpo Productions/Joe Pugliese via Getty Images)
Harpo Productions/Joe Pugliese via Getty Images
5:32

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, Duke and Duchess of Sussex, dropped bombshells on Buckingham Palace when they sought to reclaim the narrative surrounding their reported feuds and scandal with the British Royal Family.

Appearance-wise, the dramatics were flat for a couple who are seemingly hellbent on crafting a new public persona independent of Prince William and Kate Middleton, Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, and the rest of the Royal bunch.

At the core, Harry and Meghan’s tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey was a public relations ploy. The two are pitched in the hour and a half sit down as victims of the suffocating protocol of life as a Royal and wanting to break their silence. The interview isn’t anything more than an attempt to sway the public to their side.

And if this is about swaying the public, the look, the feel, the tone, the aesthetics of the interview could have actually fit the words Harry and Meghan were speaking rather than working to their disadvantage.

It is obvious Meghan wants to draw parallels between herself and Harry’s mother — Diana, Princess of Wales. When Diana gave her famous interview to Martin Bashir in 1995, she torched the Royal Family for their supposed seeing her as a “threat.” It was drama, elevated.

Diana wore a black blazer with broad shoulders, giant gold earrings that matched the gold buttons on her blazer’s sleeves and the room’s opulent decor, her hair fanned in its usual style, and black stockings with a short black skirt.

Her legs crossed during the interview, Diana was a knockout — yet, approachable — even when she was telling the most terrifyingly depressive thoughts that raced through her mind years before.

(Screenshot via BBC)

(Screenshot via BBC)

There is something to be said about the mega glossy, glowing interviews of the 1980s and 90s. They captured the realism in their subjects while revealing a glimpse into the fantasy that only they and a handful of others have lived.

Of course, this is not to compare the content of Harry and Meghan’s interview to that of Diana’s. She was explaining to the public a behind-the-scenes look into a very public separation and what her future would be in the Royal Family. At the end of the day, she was aesthetically convincing.

Harry and Meghan, on the other hand, are quite blatantly trying to explain themselves after years of bad press and criticism of their famous exit from the Royal Family. Did they accomplish that? Could their get-up have better boosted their case?

For starters, Meghan chose a black silk georgette dress by Georgio Armani, black Manolo Blahnik stilettos, and a necklace with three metals strung together as if to represent herself, Harry, and their son Archie.

Meghan’s hair was loosely pulled back into a bun with only tendrils framing her face. She looks stunning because when you’re born this beautiful, your worst day is most people’s best day.

But if we’re talking about winning over the public against a longstanding institution, a dress in the same silhouette but in a shade of lavender or blush would have been most fitting. This Diane Von Furstenberg number in pleated chiffon or even this embellished Fendi midi dress would have taken this interview from gloomy to glow.

A black dress feels out-of-step when you’re pitching my word against theirs palace tales to the public. It’s like Meghan is mourning the loss of her Royal Family connections and we’re just here to watch.

(Screenshot via CBS)

(Screenshot via CBS)

(Screenshot via CBS)

The set for the interview could have more resembled the life that Harry and Meghan are accustomed to. The backdrop is a breathtaking Santa Barbara, California, landscape with gardens plucked from Alice in Wonderland.

The furniture, unlike the interviews of the 1980s and 1990s, is drab. The chairs, for instance, look comfortable but they’re not nearly grand enough for a couple that is so renowned worldwide that this interview is airing in countries across the globe.

The farmhouse coffee table, little purple shrub, and woven Berber rug are like staples from the TJ Maxx back right corner aisle that has all the cheap rugs, pillows, and candles. Great for my back patio, odd for a Royal duo airing out their dirty laundry.

This gets me to Harry, who came into the shot about halfway through the interview. A grey suit with charcoal suede derby shoes was a great choice though Harry’s body language — slouched over, feet crossed — seemed overly casual for such shocking allegations. Meghan, on the other hand, was much more appropriately poised than both Harry and Oprah.

(Screenshot via CBS)

(Screenshot via CBS)

(Screenshot via CBS)

Harry and Meghan’s interview, truthfully, is a depiction of what’s wrong with the general state of our celebrity interviews over the last decade or two.

The photographic technology that has afforded us clearer, more vivid pictures has its cons. Gone are the days of glossy, color pallette-centric camera shots. Remember Courtney Love’s 1995 interview with Barbara Walters?

Courtney, with all her rumored drug and alcohol abuse, radiated throughout the interview, dressed as if she were the First Lady. Her skin was like porcelain and she sat next to a bouquet of flowers, even if this was not the lifestyle she was actually living. That’s some good public relations.

If the story that Harry and Meghan are trying to sell us is that they’re only wanting to correct the record about their time in Kensington Palace and Frogmore Cottage, they’ll need to glam up the drama. That is, after all, why many of us follow these otherwise boring people, isn’t it?

John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Email him at jbinder@breitbart.com. Follow him on Twitter here

Biden's Incoherence Just Hit Critical Mass, This Is Scary Awful

AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File

As we reported two days ago, Joe Biden completely made no sense when he was trying to explain the Wuhan coronavirus relief bill.

It was really bad and it explains why they’re afraid to have him deliver an address to Congress or do any kind of a real solo press conference, because at this point they have to be afraid this is all going to fall apart if he does anything live and this all becomes too obvious to the American people.

But there’s only so long that they can hold this off. And it’s getting worse, as video today revealed. Biden was holding an event to announce the nomination of two female generals to be promoted to combatant commanders. You could even see he was reading a teleprompter. But it didn’t help, he lost it in the middle.

This is just scary awful. He literally forgets the name of his Secretary of Defense, forgets the position, as well as the name of the Pentagon, calling him “the guy that runs that outfit over there.”

“I want to thank the — former general. I keep calling him General — the guy who runs that outfit over there. I want to make sure we thank the Secretary.” Yikes.

Meanwhile you see Kamala Harris standing behind him in the wings – literally – looking like a minder, wondering whether she’s going to have to help him away. Why is she or his wife always having to be there to spell him if he needs it? Biden takes no questions and forgets his mask as well.

At this point, it’s no longer a question. Whatever is going on with him medically, whatever you call it, it’s a complete train wreck. He looks in terrible condition and he looks worse every day. It’s horrible what Democrats have done here. They’ve put this guy in, all to hold onto power without giving a darn about how much that might endanger us all or even how it might hurt him. He’s having trouble just reading the teleprompter, let alone making any impromptu comments or responding independently or intelligently to questions. Shame on all the people involved in this and no, don’t even try to claim this is just a “stutter.” This is just despicable. We are all in big trouble now because of what Democrats did here. God help us all.

HT: Twitchy

No comments: