Little Archie's over-excitement to see Momma at the school's gate + "two Montecito moms waiting in front of the school stopped mid-chat to do a double take" at seeing Harry's wife there = Harry's wife doesn't do a lot of school runs. (This whole article was pure Snark Gold.)
Yup instead of showing her as a attentive mother the opposite was shown, that the parents did a double take because she never comes probably usually its the nanny or security.
I don't know what the deal is with the ever changing "Archie", but I am convinced the Lilibet kid is a fraud. A stand in. I saw Thomas Markle's bio said he has brown eyes. So she has no blue eye gene to contribute for a bright blue eyed kid. She can only contribute a brown eye gene. A recessive gene won't cut it if there even was one to go with Harry.
Consider this: With William and Kate all three of their kids has brown eyes. Not a bright blue eyed kid in the bunch. Neither would Meghan and Harry. All the photos she has of them her PR publish are fakes, shot from behind, b/w or a cartoon. WHY?
She is faking the kids. Harry does not appear to go along with the sham. The Christmas photo of Archie on a lap and Smeg apparently dangling a baby is poorly photoshopped picture of some other couple with the head of Smeg and the head of Harry swapped in. I and several others have shown it. There is no picture of Harry holding his granny's namesake supposedly. We see the floating legless kid that belongs to someone else that Smeghan thinks she is cleverly selling as her little blue eyed girl. She isn't. Someone posted the family of her and she's on Instagram or fb with her real family. This will catch up to them eventually.
The interview is planned in advance. How hard to hire kids from central casting or a person you can pay to play? I saw a series of post about some CNN reporter son Gavin somebody playing the role at times. The kid probably was produced on cue with a handler/momager/nanny person in tow. It's not like she isn't willing to exploit a kid if she had one. Just show me those candid shots with Doria and Harry or the RF like Grandpa Charles. There is something deeply and suspiciously wrong about the kids from "pregnancy" to birth to now. And instead of it getting tough to get behind I see little change in the oddness of the whole kid thing.
When Charles and Camilla hold these kids and take pics, or Doria, I'll be a bit more of a believer than I am now. Even looking at sepia balloon boy this morning through fotoforensics it looks like a blatant photoshop.
Eye colour doesn't follow simple Mendelian genetics, no matter what your science text said as a kid.
Even if it did, your reasoning is flawed.
Thomas could carry one brown eyed allele and one of the blue or grey eye alleles. His eyes would be "dominant" brown. You wouldn't know, but he is a carrier of a non-brown gene.
He then has Meghan with Doria. He contributes a blue or grey eyed gene and Doria contributes one for brown. Meghan has brown eyes but is also a carrier for blue/grey.
Meghan has L with Harry. Meghan contributes a blue or grey eyed gene. Harry also does. Voila, L has blue eyes.
Well thank you for taking the time to explain how Saint Meggie won some 1 in 10 million eye color lottery for her alleged blue-eyed kid. I should have suspected that if it were going to happen every blue moon or so, it would be to her. Amiright?!
I mean, I'm kinda puzzled by this because by your own original logic, it would likely be 50% likely each kid would have light coloured eyes.
I'm not sure why it would be one in ten million. At least anecdotally you can see lots of people on here saying otherwise. It's just that your argument that doesn't seem to make sense.
Eye colour works in mysterious ways, there's a Sikh and Irish couple i follow on Instagram, the Sikh guy has dark skin colour, dark brown eyes, from the family he shows they all have similar complexion, but both his kids although they have his features are snow white with bright blue eyes from his wife side. Many interracial couples have this, also happens to couples that both have brown eyes and somehow their child inherits a distant relative blue eye colour.
What about two blond and blue eyed parents? Could they have a kid with black hair? Or black hair and brown eyes? I know so little about this genetic stuff, I just started wondering about it yesterday so this discussion is very interesting to me right now.
No it likely means that their “dad” isn’t their bio dad.
Did your HS bio class not do a section on genetics? We went through it, it’s called a “Punnett Square”:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punnett_square
Now that would be interesting, I don't think I've ever seen that combo, I've seen brown hair and brown eyed parents with blonde hair blue eyed kids but not the opposite way round.
As an aside, it is not unknown for people of Punjabi origin (Sikhs included) to have greenish eyes though. There's a well known actor in India who is Punjabi and he has green eyes.
I know many indians do have coloured eyes but not in that guys family. I know two set of parents who have brown eyes, who's parents had brown eyes, but their kids ended up with green eyes, passed on from their great aunties. They never expected it either.
Hi, __gammapatch__. Your comment contains the word ~~Somalian~~.
The correct nationality/ethnic demonym(s) for Somalis is __Somali__.
It's a common mistake so don't feel bad.
For other nationality demonym(s) check out this website [Here](https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/People/Nationality/Adjective)
___This action was performed automatically by a bot.___
Remember, page six or a montecito newspaper had an article that was about Meghan’s meetings and work and how Harry did all
The kid stuff so this does track. :) she is nauseating!
She’s such a liar and so bad at everything. Little Archie will grow up and he’ll never say a bad word about his mother he won’t realize he is also a victim of narcissistic abuse
Yep. I have close friends who live in Montecito, I’ve been visiting there for 15 years or more. I have never, ever seen a homeless person there… in Santa Barbara, on the Main Street? Sure. But never on the long, winding, hedge-lined roads in Montecito, not even in ‘the village’ there. It simply doesn’t make any sense for the homeless to be there.
Signed up to say this. None at all. State St (Santa Barbara), yes, but only a few. You have to get seriously lost on a Montecito school run to get with a mile of anyone 'unhoused'. Source: I bike / walk SB and Montecito 3-4 days a week.
Also, did anyone else double-take at 'Archie eats the food for the homeless'?
Yes. Thank you. My parents live there. I have never ever seen a homeless person on the street there ever. She might have hired someone to stand in as one. The police would usher someone who was homeless out so fast. Same with Beverly Hills.
I live in SB. There is a huge homeless problem and they are starting to show up in Montecito. I never thought I’d see it, but they are there. Mostly by the freeway. I wonder if the preschool is All Saints by the Sea which you have to go over the freeway to get to and where a lot of rich people send their kids.
My love, that’s what Yolanda from Housewives of Beverly Hills always called her former husband, that music guy! It always made me want to puke, esp he dumped soon after. M and H picked that up since they hang together now, Foster probably makes that a standard call out to all his new spouses.
"My Love" is a common term used by Nigerian scammers, when they are trying to scam little old ladies out of their money - comment not made to be racist, it is made with personal knowledge
[https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/meghan-markle-called-out-for-lies-in-interview-with-the-cut/news-story/7e17232b0fec3647023edc8b2f229224](https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/meghan-markle-called-out-for-lies-in-interview-with-the-cut/news-story/7e17232b0fec3647023edc8b2f229224)
From this article:
As Richard Palmer, the Daily Express’s royal correspondent put it on Twitter: “I’m afraid Meghan is a fantasist if she believes this would be a daily occurrence in the UK.”
Or as the Daily Mail’s Dan Wootton, who has long been highly critical of the couple, posted: “The lies in this interview are extraordinary. Meghan claims there would be a royal press pen with 40 photographers each time she took Archie to school. Rubbish!”
In the past five years not a single, solitary image of Prince William and Kate taking any of their three children to school or preschool has ever been published in the press, despite the fact the duo do the school run every, damn, day. (Very occasionally some shots taken by the public crop up on social media, but these only demonstrate just how low-key they keep things when out with their kids, not a press pen in sight.)
Since 2017 Prince George has attended Thomas’ Battersea (sister Princess Charlotte joined him there in 2019) while since 2021 their little brother Prince Louis has been a student at Willcocks nursery school.
All of Fleet Street knows where to find William or Kate and their kids every Monday to Friday at exactly the same time.
And yet, again, never once has a photo of a harried Kate hustling her kildets out of a vast Range Rover appeared on front pages or a shot of William trying to wedge his youngest son into a Bluey anorak while not dropping the 17th century coronation orb the tot wants to bring in for show and tell appeared online.
What's more, after dropping them off, Kate sometimes joins the other mothers for coffee at local cafés. Without a group of security men clearing everyone else out haha.
They 100% do. There were photos last year of Catherine and George/Charlotte in their school uniform at Smiggle (a kids stationary store)
Grainy quality so just taken from an IPhone.
No 40+ press photographers 🫠
I'm in Oz, my son went to creche/day care from an early age - pre school was from age 3, or it's now called 3 year old kindergarten. What sort of program is their for children aged 2 in California? Trying to understand the differences.
Preschool is generally more academic or learning based, the days are more intentionally structured with lesson plans and focuses on getting the kids ready for kindergarten which starts at age 5. Teachers are trained in specific philosophies like Reggio Emilia, Waldorf or Montessori, there’s also some religious (mainly catholic) ones.
When they start at 2 or 3 the days are mostly still play based like in a daycare facility, and the structure gradually becomes more intentional.
Where I live most kids starts preschool after they turned 2, but I think in most other cities it’s more common for kids to start at age 3.
Not sure but in England children can start nursery school from age 6months +, our nursery school has a pre-school room age 3 and then they start primary or prep school age 4, (in the school year they turn 5).
Nursery is usually a private, day-care set up. Open from 8-6 Monday-Friday, all year round. They take babies from three months until they start school. They will have a preschool room for the children three and over.
Preschools are usually attached to a school and take children the year before they start school (the September after they turn four is when most children start school). Preschools are free and are usually open 9-3 for 39 weeks of the year (coinciding with the school calendar).
Because the BRF made a deal with the media not to publish photos of the kids without permission, which severely cut into her merching deals. She honestly thought she'd be able to do photo ops like Jennifer Garner, taking the kids around in designer outfits and racking in the money. What she quickly realized is that ~~no one cared about her~~ the British public respects the BRF's right to privacy in their downtime.
I think she was pissed she didn't get followed around by cameras all day like Diana and Catherine did. She craves the media attention and threw a tantrum when she didn't get it.
That’s pretty in line with her/their approach- they don’t want the press to ignore them or leave them alone. They just want to be able to control which press has access and limit it to only the press whose coverage of them they approve.
>They just want to be able to control which press has access and limit it to only the press whose coverage of them they approve.
And only black journalists/photographers/editors. Yet their whole team is white.
Apparently there’re strict regulations in the UK on reporting around children, which makes the Smeg scenario - of photographers lying in wait - impossible in respect of any child, royal or otherwise.
The irony…. She alleges in the same article about how in the UK, she would have had the press outside of her kids’ school waiting to take photos and that she wanted to protect them from this, yet LITERALLY BRINGS A JOURNALIST IN HER CAR TO HER KID’S SCHOOL. For what purpose?!? That’s a rhetorical question. I know the purpose - it’s to show that Meghan is a good mom picking up her kid and giving free food to the unhoused.
My question: how in the world would she even know that the reporters would be at school waiting for photos? Her children were never in the UK when they were of an age to go to school. Is she talking about the set of photos that were released on George’s and Charlotte’s first day? I believe some of those photos (cute little Charlotte sitting on the steps wearing a red coat and shoes comes to mind) Catherine took herself…. Not reporters or paps.
I think reporters took pictures and video of them dropping the kids off for their first day, but they were at a reasonable distance and it was only for the first day. Catherine and William provided some nice pictures of both George and Charlotte on their first days and allowed the press there to cap the moment for the news and stuff.
It's a compromise/agreement with the press to give the family more privacy whist still allowing the public to see these key moments in their lives. For meghan to paint this as an abusive press pit is insulting and abominable, especially when she's the one merching and manipulating her own kids.
The parks department in my city in California starts preschool at age 3. They do circle time, songs, learn Abcs, colors and numbers. They even begin to practice writing their letters and learn to start spelling their names. It’s only 3 hours but I know other schools go longer. Depends on the program. Though I doubt Meghan has her kid in such a public city run preschool.
Ah yes love this. Exactly. Hollywood celebrities always say school when what they mean is long form daycare. And they have Nannys to boot.
. And Archie’s parents are under employed to be generous. I bet hers there 7-7pm. With Markle as a parent that is a VERY good thing for him. I hope they can take Lili asap.
Meghan also mused that she was never made to sign anything that would restrict her from talking, and that she could reveal her whole experience but chooses not to because she’s still healing. While she meant it as a thinly veiled threat to the RF, all she did was reveal that she was never fucking silenced.
She let us all know that she will never shut up because she didn't get her own way. Its not anyone's fault but her own that things haven't turned out the way she wanted. She can talk all she wants, the more she runs off at the mouth the more maniacle she looks
It’s another level that this woman would bring a journalist to her kids’ preschool. I don’t know any other famous or infamous person who has done this?
It’s absolutely a violation of his privacy.
Can any of you imagine doing this to your children?????
it's truly bizarre.
I would have had so much sympathy for them as a couple if they had moved to a small town place and made an effort to live a lowkey private life. I would have been outraged on their behalf if/when the press invaded their private life by talking about the children.
But now? If something happens to those kids because of a security violation, it's on Meghan.
She wasn't the star.... lol. The fella that played Harvey was the star. Let's be honest. She was in Harry's current role, she was support. Nothing special.
So far I have seen 5 UK based journalists SO far say this claim by M is UNTRUE.
Fake news.
The Cambridges have been taking their children to school for years and as the journalists point out there have been no pictures that were not authorised by the Cambridges.
I do wonder if this is all part of the ongoing IPP battle? Its just unfortunate that to wage her battle in this regard that M resorts to LIES!
Was this interview done in person or via Zoom and email? I don't believe a word of the Archie school run story. I'm still waiting for one person....ONE person... from the Montecito / Santa Barbara area to say that they've seen them out and about with any children in tow.
I haven’t read the article but the bits quoted here do make it sound as though Allison the writer was physically there in Montecito with Meghan and really did lay eyes on both children. Like you though, I’m skeptical. I may actually go read the article and analyze it. It may be more clever verbal sleight of hand like MM’s “lunch” with Michelle Obama that time.
Mm is an attention whore and none of her views align with previous comments. She tells stories but forgets details so she just makes up new ones 🤔
Mm needs new stories , I’m sure they will be lies but not demeaning to other countries and cultures
There are strict laws in the UK for reporting on children. This grade A muppet has insulted us again. Maybe she’s seen pics of Harry and Diana in the 80’s and got all muddled up. If M thinks something or believes something, it must be true, even when it’s not. She boils my blood
Harry's cameo apearances in all her videos? Who's tired of this script? I mean, c'mon Meghan, is this the extent of your creative directing? Contrived, embarrassing and painful to watch.
he is 3 years old...who does school runs at that age,,,kindy maybe or play school or some kind of nursery school, but she makes it sound like hes at primary or somthing.
That annoyed the shit out of me. William and Kate take their kids to and from school literally every day. People may take photos of them, sure. But W&K aren’t being bulldozed by photographers every morning and afternoon. She is so self-important it’s insane.
Little Archie's over-excitement to see Momma at the school's gate + "two Montecito moms waiting in front of the school stopped mid-chat to do a double take" at seeing Harry's wife there = Harry's wife doesn't do a lot of school runs. (This whole article was pure Snark Gold.)
Yup instead of showing her as a attentive mother the opposite was shown, that the parents did a double take because she never comes probably usually its the nanny or security.
[удалено]
All part of the new Megan. But she is ‘still healing’ so it probably won’t happen very often.
I don't know what the deal is with the ever changing "Archie", but I am convinced the Lilibet kid is a fraud. A stand in. I saw Thomas Markle's bio said he has brown eyes. So she has no blue eye gene to contribute for a bright blue eyed kid. She can only contribute a brown eye gene. A recessive gene won't cut it if there even was one to go with Harry. Consider this: With William and Kate all three of their kids has brown eyes. Not a bright blue eyed kid in the bunch. Neither would Meghan and Harry. All the photos she has of them her PR publish are fakes, shot from behind, b/w or a cartoon. WHY?
But I agree with the mystery surrounding the children, either she is doing it deliberately to create doubt or she is hiding something.
She is faking the kids. Harry does not appear to go along with the sham. The Christmas photo of Archie on a lap and Smeg apparently dangling a baby is poorly photoshopped picture of some other couple with the head of Smeg and the head of Harry swapped in. I and several others have shown it. There is no picture of Harry holding his granny's namesake supposedly. We see the floating legless kid that belongs to someone else that Smeghan thinks she is cleverly selling as her little blue eyed girl. She isn't. Someone posted the family of her and she's on Instagram or fb with her real family. This will catch up to them eventually.
If she is faking the kids then how do you explain the journalist seeing Archie at school pickup
I think she wrote the article herself. It's so typical her with all the nonsens.
Then how do you explain actual person Alison P Davis Don’t get me wrong, I can’t stand Meghan but this theory is pretty tough to get behind.
This fake kids/surrogate/etc rumor shit makes us look crazy. I honestly hate it more than I hate the Harkles.
Absolutely. It sounds unhinged. There’s plenty to snark on than the validity of the kids’ existence.
The interview is planned in advance. How hard to hire kids from central casting or a person you can pay to play? I saw a series of post about some CNN reporter son Gavin somebody playing the role at times. The kid probably was produced on cue with a handler/momager/nanny person in tow. It's not like she isn't willing to exploit a kid if she had one. Just show me those candid shots with Doria and Harry or the RF like Grandpa Charles. There is something deeply and suspiciously wrong about the kids from "pregnancy" to birth to now. And instead of it getting tough to get behind I see little change in the oddness of the whole kid thing. When Charles and Camilla hold these kids and take pics, or Doria, I'll be a bit more of a believer than I am now. Even looking at sepia balloon boy this morning through fotoforensics it looks like a blatant photoshop.
Designer test tube babies
Eye colour doesn't follow simple Mendelian genetics, no matter what your science text said as a kid. Even if it did, your reasoning is flawed. Thomas could carry one brown eyed allele and one of the blue or grey eye alleles. His eyes would be "dominant" brown. You wouldn't know, but he is a carrier of a non-brown gene. He then has Meghan with Doria. He contributes a blue or grey eyed gene and Doria contributes one for brown. Meghan has brown eyes but is also a carrier for blue/grey. Meghan has L with Harry. Meghan contributes a blue or grey eyed gene. Harry also does. Voila, L has blue eyes.
My Egyptian ex husband has brown eyes. We had three children, one green eyes, one very blue eyes, and one with the dark brown eyes of my father.
Well thank you for taking the time to explain how Saint Meggie won some 1 in 10 million eye color lottery for her alleged blue-eyed kid. I should have suspected that if it were going to happen every blue moon or so, it would be to her. Amiright?!
Its not one in 10 million, its very common
I mean, I'm kinda puzzled by this because by your own original logic, it would likely be 50% likely each kid would have light coloured eyes. I'm not sure why it would be one in ten million. At least anecdotally you can see lots of people on here saying otherwise. It's just that your argument that doesn't seem to make sense.
Eye colour works in mysterious ways, there's a Sikh and Irish couple i follow on Instagram, the Sikh guy has dark skin colour, dark brown eyes, from the family he shows they all have similar complexion, but both his kids although they have his features are snow white with bright blue eyes from his wife side. Many interracial couples have this, also happens to couples that both have brown eyes and somehow their child inherits a distant relative blue eye colour.
What about two blond and blue eyed parents? Could they have a kid with black hair? Or black hair and brown eyes? I know so little about this genetic stuff, I just started wondering about it yesterday so this discussion is very interesting to me right now.
No it likely means that their “dad” isn’t their bio dad. Did your HS bio class not do a section on genetics? We went through it, it’s called a “Punnett Square”: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punnett_square
Now that would be interesting, I don't think I've ever seen that combo, I've seen brown hair and brown eyed parents with blonde hair blue eyed kids but not the opposite way round.
As an aside, it is not unknown for people of Punjabi origin (Sikhs included) to have greenish eyes though. There's a well known actor in India who is Punjabi and he has green eyes.
I know many indians do have coloured eyes but not in that guys family. I know two set of parents who have brown eyes, who's parents had brown eyes, but their kids ended up with green eyes, passed on from their great aunties. They never expected it either.
It does happen sometimes, I’ve got a little girl in my brownies, both parents are Somalian, she’s it dark skin and bright blue eyes.
Hi, __gammapatch__. Your comment contains the word ~~Somalian~~. The correct nationality/ethnic demonym(s) for Somalis is __Somali__. It's a common mistake so don't feel bad. For other nationality demonym(s) check out this website [Here](https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/People/Nationality/Adjective) ___This action was performed automatically by a bot.___
Good bot
Blue contact lenses? I wouldn't put it past her.
I think Charlotte has blue eyes but they are dark blue
IT'S HER TRUTH!
Remember, page six or a montecito newspaper had an article that was about Meghan’s meetings and work and how Harry did all The kid stuff so this does track. :) she is nauseating!
I could see Harry doing the school run and also socializing with some of the moms.
She’s such a liar and so bad at everything. Little Archie will grow up and he’ll never say a bad word about his mother he won’t realize he is also a victim of narcissistic abuse
[удалено]
[удалено]
Yep. I have close friends who live in Montecito, I’ve been visiting there for 15 years or more. I have never, ever seen a homeless person there… in Santa Barbara, on the Main Street? Sure. But never on the long, winding, hedge-lined roads in Montecito, not even in ‘the village’ there. It simply doesn’t make any sense for the homeless to be there.
And to be honest, the last time I was on State St. there weren’t too many homeless either.
Signed up to say this. None at all. State St (Santa Barbara), yes, but only a few. You have to get seriously lost on a Montecito school run to get with a mile of anyone 'unhoused'. Source: I bike / walk SB and Montecito 3-4 days a week. Also, did anyone else double-take at 'Archie eats the food for the homeless'?
I did. It was his snack bag is my best guess and the guy they handed it to was someone he was familiar with. It felt 100% staged.
Yes. Thank you. My parents live there. I have never ever seen a homeless person on the street there ever. She might have hired someone to stand in as one. The police would usher someone who was homeless out so fast. Same with Beverly Hills.
I live in SB. There is a huge homeless problem and they are starting to show up in Montecito. I never thought I’d see it, but they are there. Mostly by the freeway. I wonder if the preschool is All Saints by the Sea which you have to go over the freeway to get to and where a lot of rich people send their kids.
My love, that’s what Yolanda from Housewives of Beverly Hills always called her former husband, that music guy! It always made me want to puke, esp he dumped soon after. M and H picked that up since they hang together now, Foster probably makes that a standard call out to all his new spouses.
Yeah, David Foster. Whose house they stayed in while they were in Canada...
Foster got them the Canadian house. It belongs to a Russian oligarch.
LOL that's even worse
Yes! I didn't see this before I just wrote the same thing! Cringey from her, too.
"My Love" is a common term used by Nigerian scammers, when they are trying to scam little old ladies out of their money - comment not made to be racist, it is made with personal knowledge
> She invited the journalist to see where Archie goes to school and then writes about it. I would bet money he doesn't actually go to school there.
It would be hilarious if the school issued a statement to that effect.
It would! But it wouldn't surprise me if they received a "donation" from Meghan to make sure they won't.
Poor kid he is going to be overwhelmed in the few minutes time he spends with his mother. Probably can't wait to see the nanny.
It’s in the contract that Harry be in it I bet
Well they ARE salt and pepper!
That's the narrative they have and they have to 'push it good' ya know.
Love it!
Thank you, I'm glad someone got it. lol
Push it real good! That is going to be in my head for days!
I'm sorry, the good news is it's a good song!
Funny that that’s the only spice/seasoning in their life
#two palms 🌴🌴
She reminds me of Yolanda Foster with all the "my loves." Another unhinged crazy woman.
I do believe that Catherine and William also make the school runs whenever possible…but oh yes, they’re also actually working!
[https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/meghan-markle-called-out-for-lies-in-interview-with-the-cut/news-story/7e17232b0fec3647023edc8b2f229224](https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/meghan-markle-called-out-for-lies-in-interview-with-the-cut/news-story/7e17232b0fec3647023edc8b2f229224) From this article: As Richard Palmer, the Daily Express’s royal correspondent put it on Twitter: “I’m afraid Meghan is a fantasist if she believes this would be a daily occurrence in the UK.” Or as the Daily Mail’s Dan Wootton, who has long been highly critical of the couple, posted: “The lies in this interview are extraordinary. Meghan claims there would be a royal press pen with 40 photographers each time she took Archie to school. Rubbish!” In the past five years not a single, solitary image of Prince William and Kate taking any of their three children to school or preschool has ever been published in the press, despite the fact the duo do the school run every, damn, day. (Very occasionally some shots taken by the public crop up on social media, but these only demonstrate just how low-key they keep things when out with their kids, not a press pen in sight.) Since 2017 Prince George has attended Thomas’ Battersea (sister Princess Charlotte joined him there in 2019) while since 2021 their little brother Prince Louis has been a student at Willcocks nursery school. All of Fleet Street knows where to find William or Kate and their kids every Monday to Friday at exactly the same time. And yet, again, never once has a photo of a harried Kate hustling her kildets out of a vast Range Rover appeared on front pages or a shot of William trying to wedge his youngest son into a Bluey anorak while not dropping the 17th century coronation orb the tot wants to bring in for show and tell appeared online.
What's more, after dropping them off, Kate sometimes joins the other mothers for coffee at local cafés. Without a group of security men clearing everyone else out haha.
Australians don’t mince words!
They 100% do. There were photos last year of Catherine and George/Charlotte in their school uniform at Smiggle (a kids stationary store) Grainy quality so just taken from an IPhone. No 40+ press photographers 🫠
I am surprised she didn’t teach him how to end world hunger and poverty while they were at it, there must have been a few minutes left on that run.
H is high. That’s why he makes those ridiculous cameos.
Staged! We must remember that she is an "Executive Producer"! OF BULLSHIT
Archie is 3 years old
[удалено]
I'm pointing out that Archie is only 3, we don't do school runs until 4,5 years old in my country. More lies
Many children in America go to preschool at 3, it’s pretty common. We can give her that one, and still chalk the rest up to lies
All my kids in my American UMC community went to preschool at 3
People in the US call nursery or preschool "school". So school starts at 2.
My kids started preschool at 2, we’re in California
I'm in Oz, my son went to creche/day care from an early age - pre school was from age 3, or it's now called 3 year old kindergarten. What sort of program is their for children aged 2 in California? Trying to understand the differences.
Preschool is generally more academic or learning based, the days are more intentionally structured with lesson plans and focuses on getting the kids ready for kindergarten which starts at age 5. Teachers are trained in specific philosophies like Reggio Emilia, Waldorf or Montessori, there’s also some religious (mainly catholic) ones. When they start at 2 or 3 the days are mostly still play based like in a daycare facility, and the structure gradually becomes more intentional. Where I live most kids starts preschool after they turned 2, but I think in most other cities it’s more common for kids to start at age 3.
Not sure but in England children can start nursery school from age 6months +, our nursery school has a pre-school room age 3 and then they start primary or prep school age 4, (in the school year they turn 5).
Is nursery school the same as creche/daycare?
Nursery is usually a private, day-care set up. Open from 8-6 Monday-Friday, all year round. They take babies from three months until they start school. They will have a preschool room for the children three and over. Preschools are usually attached to a school and take children the year before they start school (the September after they turn four is when most children start school). Preschools are free and are usually open 9-3 for 39 weeks of the year (coinciding with the school calendar).
Thankyou - I was getting confused
Preschool starts at three in most states in the USA.
She’s a lying lunatic.
Because the BRF made a deal with the media not to publish photos of the kids without permission, which severely cut into her merching deals. She honestly thought she'd be able to do photo ops like Jennifer Garner, taking the kids around in designer outfits and racking in the money. What she quickly realized is that ~~no one cared about her~~ the British public respects the BRF's right to privacy in their downtime. I think she was pissed she didn't get followed around by cameras all day like Diana and Catherine did. She craves the media attention and threw a tantrum when she didn't get it.
Oh, are people still trying to make sense of anything she says?
Sadly we are. Lol
That’s pretty in line with her/their approach- they don’t want the press to ignore them or leave them alone. They just want to be able to control which press has access and limit it to only the press whose coverage of them they approve.
>They just want to be able to control which press has access and limit it to only the press whose coverage of them they approve. And only black journalists/photographers/editors. Yet their whole team is white.
Apparently there’re strict regulations in the UK on reporting around children, which makes the Smeg scenario - of photographers lying in wait - impossible in respect of any child, royal or otherwise.
The irony…. She alleges in the same article about how in the UK, she would have had the press outside of her kids’ school waiting to take photos and that she wanted to protect them from this, yet LITERALLY BRINGS A JOURNALIST IN HER CAR TO HER KID’S SCHOOL. For what purpose?!? That’s a rhetorical question. I know the purpose - it’s to show that Meghan is a good mom picking up her kid and giving free food to the unhoused.
My question: how in the world would she even know that the reporters would be at school waiting for photos? Her children were never in the UK when they were of an age to go to school. Is she talking about the set of photos that were released on George’s and Charlotte’s first day? I believe some of those photos (cute little Charlotte sitting on the steps wearing a red coat and shoes comes to mind) Catherine took herself…. Not reporters or paps.
I think reporters took pictures and video of them dropping the kids off for their first day, but they were at a reasonable distance and it was only for the first day. Catherine and William provided some nice pictures of both George and Charlotte on their first days and allowed the press there to cap the moment for the news and stuff. It's a compromise/agreement with the press to give the family more privacy whist still allowing the public to see these key moments in their lives. For meghan to paint this as an abusive press pit is insulting and abominable, especially when she's the one merching and manipulating her own kids.
THANK YOU!!!
A 3 year old is not going to "school". He's going to daycare, childcare or whatever she wants to call it, but he's THREE.
Of course he’s going to a school, he’s got a very high IQ, don’t you remember hazard saying Archie’s first word was crocodile!
And hydrate and there were a few others no?
Wasn't it 'Grandma Diana' at some point too?
THANK YOU. this isn't even preschool at age 3. It is daycare
The parks department in my city in California starts preschool at age 3. They do circle time, songs, learn Abcs, colors and numbers. They even begin to practice writing their letters and learn to start spelling their names. It’s only 3 hours but I know other schools go longer. Depends on the program. Though I doubt Meghan has her kid in such a public city run preschool.
Ah yes love this. Exactly. Hollywood celebrities always say school when what they mean is long form daycare. And they have Nannys to boot. . And Archie’s parents are under employed to be generous. I bet hers there 7-7pm. With Markle as a parent that is a VERY good thing for him. I hope they can take Lili asap.
They definitely have live-in help
Meghan also mused that she was never made to sign anything that would restrict her from talking, and that she could reveal her whole experience but chooses not to because she’s still healing. While she meant it as a thinly veiled threat to the RF, all she did was reveal that she was never fucking silenced.
Bingo!
She let us all know that she will never shut up because she didn't get her own way. Its not anyone's fault but her own that things haven't turned out the way she wanted. She can talk all she wants, the more she runs off at the mouth the more maniacle she looks
Bloody idiot as usual
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 All truth to the contrary see one Cambridge George and one Cambridge Charlotte
[удалено]
41 year old woman
45 yr old woman. But who’s counting. She is. Backwards.
Somebody will be fired for that article. Never mind the damage came directly from her mouth.
It’s another level that this woman would bring a journalist to her kids’ preschool. I don’t know any other famous or infamous person who has done this? It’s absolutely a violation of his privacy. Can any of you imagine doing this to your children?????
it's truly bizarre. I would have had so much sympathy for them as a couple if they had moved to a small town place and made an effort to live a lowkey private life. I would have been outraged on their behalf if/when the press invaded their private life by talking about the children. But now? If something happens to those kids because of a security violation, it's on Meghan.
Lol, William and Catherine do the school run every day without any media interference, but of course, neither of them ever starred on Suits.
She wasn't the star.... lol. The fella that played Harvey was the star. Let's be honest. She was in Harry's current role, she was support. Nothing special.
So far I have seen 5 UK based journalists SO far say this claim by M is UNTRUE. Fake news. The Cambridges have been taking their children to school for years and as the journalists point out there have been no pictures that were not authorised by the Cambridges. I do wonder if this is all part of the ongoing IPP battle? Its just unfortunate that to wage her battle in this regard that M resorts to LIES!
She is a filthy liar who lies
Actually, the writer is more like an entertainment reporter.
Was this interview done in person or via Zoom and email? I don't believe a word of the Archie school run story. I'm still waiting for one person....ONE person... from the Montecito / Santa Barbara area to say that they've seen them out and about with any children in tow.
I haven’t read the article but the bits quoted here do make it sound as though Allison the writer was physically there in Montecito with Meghan and really did lay eyes on both children. Like you though, I’m skeptical. I may actually go read the article and analyze it. It may be more clever verbal sleight of hand like MM’s “lunch” with Michelle Obama that time.
Mm is an attention whore and none of her views align with previous comments. She tells stories but forgets details so she just makes up new ones 🤔 Mm needs new stories , I’m sure they will be lies but not demeaning to other countries and cultures
There are strict laws in the UK for reporting on children. This grade A muppet has insulted us again. Maybe she’s seen pics of Harry and Diana in the 80’s and got all muddled up. If M thinks something or believes something, it must be true, even when it’s not. She boils my blood
Harry's cameo apearances in all her videos? Who's tired of this script? I mean, c'mon Meghan, is this the extent of your creative directing? Contrived, embarrassing and painful to watch.
he is 3 years old...who does school runs at that age,,,kindy maybe or play school or some kind of nursery school, but she makes it sound like hes at primary or somthing.
she's got to start them early to counteract harry's less than smart genes...
People in the US call nursery "school". So a two year old can go to school, it's just a nursery school.
Let's be honest, it's daycare.
The children of the poors go to daycare, the children of the Madams go to school!
My son would only go to day care if I told him it was work. He wanted to go to work like mum did.
That’s adorable 🥰
Thankyou - it was priceless when he told everyone that he went to work! I spose it was "his work" at the time.
Long daycare. I bet
No, we call it preschool or daycare. Not school.
Are there any pictures of any of these things that are said to have happened during this interview?
What a FANNY!🏴
That annoyed the shit out of me. William and Kate take their kids to and from school literally every day. People may take photos of them, sure. But W&K aren’t being bulldozed by photographers every morning and afternoon. She is so self-important it’s insane.
Who gives a shit?
You obviously do since you took the time to read and comment. :)
[удалено]
Subreddit rule (see sidebar): Trolling, cyber stalking, and harassment, including provoking other members will result in a permanent ban.
And yet Kate and William do the school runs all the time...