Ha ha! Only because you are looking through your own twisted lenses! 
If I gave a shit about celebrities, I could likely come up w/ quite a list of all manner of celebs whose self-serving claims I was dubious of. But by all means, please impose your agenda on me.
…how was what Smollet did even remotely close to what Markle did? They aren’t even in the same ballpark. Not even in the same planet. You’ve simply made an assumption she lied because :: points at random black man ::
So lets hear your list then. What other celebrities who have made “self serving claims” do you also doubt?
As the Queen diplomatically put it in her statement: “Some recollections may vary.”
Coming from her, that’s a very strong statement. What it means is: “Some of what you said was bullshit.”
It would take a hell of a lot more than this to make them “skip over him.” That’s not how royalty works.
I have no interest in engaging with you or making this about me.
Please continue with your negative perception of me.
What is it you think she’s trying to get out of this “self-serving” interview? It you take it at face value, she’s simply trying to repair her reputation. Is that really so suspicious? Did she say anything that’s hard to believe or strains credulity?
Yeah, I mean, let’s face it, there are questions a person could ask about the possible skin tone of an unborn baby that might not be entirely sensitive to ask, at the same time as not being racist at all in intent.
True. If you decide one person doesn’t deserve to be the monarch, you open up the question of whether any person deserves to be the monarch. The system is based on the principle that you “earn” your place by being born into it.
They could simply pass a law that nobody can start being King or Queen after the age of 70. There has been talk of skipping Charles for a while .
As far as which royal remarked on the skin color of the baby, my money’s on Andrew.
It could have been somebody like George (aged 5 at the time), who simply didn’t know any better but heard something from one of the kids at school, or it could have been that nobody asked the question at all and either Harry or Meghan felt the need to invent a story. Or, it could have been somebody known to be a piece of work but who is too far from the throne to matter (Princess Michael of Kent would be a candidate here, she of the blackamoor jewelry and the Nazi father). Or it could have been Charles or Andrew or William or Kate or somebody else quite high up.
The way they choose to reveal it stinks, in any case. It was “too damaging” to say who, so instead they let ALL of the senior royals be tagged as maybe saying something beyond the pale, and in so doing be damaged.
It’s interesting that some people believe that if you’re rich, you don’t get to complain–or “whine” as one poster here put it–about any aspect of your life, no matter how awful. In fact, the thinking goes, nothing could be so terrible that it isn’t more than offset by all that money.
And if you’re an actor, everything you say or emotion you express is false, and your sole motive is publicity, even your complaint about publicity, publicity being the same, you see, as glittering fame. The fact that few humans aren’t affected by how others view them and that negative publicity means millions adopt that same viewpoint simply doesn’t measure up to the supposed glories of fame.
As simplistic as those views are, they do show how bitter jealousy can warp our perspective and eclipse our compassion.
Only by people on social media boards who don’t know anything about the British Constitution.
I thought Andrew was pretty much a nobody now after his Epstein issues. And he was being ignored by everyone else in the family.
But… what if it was Kate…? If so, if The Monarchy is to go to a King with a racist Queen, might it not be doomed?
Harry and Meghan need to develop a “brand” to be able to support themselves financially in the manner to which they have been accustomed (or, more charitably, to have the kind of influence as social reformers that they have sought). Controversy sells; an interview with Oprah yields the kind of publicity that money will never be able to buy. If you’re looking for a self-serving purpose, that’s an obvious one. (The book about their departure, Finding Freedom, was an instant bestseller but hit the remainder shelves fairly quickly, which suggests a loyal base of fans but not a widespread one.)
As far as straining credulity, the notion that she did no research at all about what life in the family would be like and Harry didn’t bother to tell her about anything (such as the vicious tabloids (which had bedeviled his sister-in-law Kate for more than a decade) is hard to believe. To hear her tell it, she had no idea whatsoever that she was joining what amounts to a family business with a rigid hierarchy, in which she wasn’t on the path to the top. She’s not an airhead, though, so what did she imagine her role would be?
One of her complaints, for example, was that the palace communications team expected to be involved in vetting her interviews. Um, yeah. Heck, I’m middle management and I know I don’t get to speak for my employer without the PR staff approving it; was she that naive?
One of the things that made me shift the ol’ eyebrow is how often they were lambasting Meghan for doing something that they celebrated Kate for doing, like not wearing a hat, or eating an avocado.
Does that seem likely? It strikes as something that an older relative would say - come on everyone, we all have one. I also don’t imagine Charles saying it – love him or loathe him, he takes his position very seriously and he’s always put a lot of store around helping minority groups through his charities, and expressing a desire to be ‘Defender of Faith’ rather than ‘Defender of the Faith’. It just doesn’t ring right for me. (Now I shall be proved wrong).
My guesses: Andrew, Camilla, Princess Michael, maybe Anne (although I’d be disappointed if that were the case, as I actually rather respect her).
people were fond of saying hollywood stars/actors are like American royalty. So maybe Meghan figured she was moving from one area of royalty to another.
Eh, back in the day they lambasted Kate for that sort of stuff too. There were a lot of articles about how “common” she was, and how she didn’t know how to dress properly, and even how wearing dark nail polish was a “breach of protocol” and so very shocking. Eventually the tabs found a new target, and if there is a heel then there must be a face to compare her to; in recent years Meghan is the heel and Kate the face, but Kate used to be the heel with Diana as the face.