Nessmines retweeted
If, by the way, the same situation that just happened in Brazil had happened but with the parties switched -- if Bolsonaro had won last night's election and then a pro-Bolsonaro judge sent the Federal Police to seize Lula's passport and bar him from leaving the country -- every major western media outlet and liberal NGOs would be screaming about the authoritarian attack on Brazil's elections and the destruction of basic freedoms.
Nessmines retweeted
You don’t argue with the Crown. Keep pushing and you risk turning a semantic dispute into a constitutional reckoning: the removal of titles from an increasingly fringe group. You cannot self-appoint as royal. Blood gives you a family connection, not a constitutional mandate. The Crown derives its legitimacy from the constitution and the consent of the British people. The King is the institution’s head. Other family members are either private individuals or representatives of the Crown. And yet Americans with no British citizenship are using inherited British titles to monetise royal status, access and celebrity on a scale they could never command in their own right. These titles are not private intellectual property. The moment constitutional status becomes a commercial asset, the question stops being personal and becomes constitutional. The Crown is not a brand. And the British constitution is not a business opportunity.
Nessmines retweeted
Are journalists supposed to report the news, or manufacture a narrative to rehabilitate Meghan Markle’s image? And is The Sun working overtime to make sure we all get the memo?
Clemmie Moodie calls it a “thumping vindication.” The Telegraph pushes the “relief and vindication” angle. Camilla Tominey and Tim Stanley debate whether public opinion of Meghan should change. Jonny Dymond at the BBC discusses the vindication narrative, while Roya Nikkhah at The Sunday Times, Chris Ship at ITV and Matt Wilkinson at The Sun amplify the protective-letter narrative and the Met’s confirmation.
The message is unmistakable: we should now understand why Meghan cut contact with her father, and apparently that should change how we view everything else she has done.
But vindication of WHAT, exactly?
Whatever the truth of the allegations against Thomas Markle, which he denies and which remain under investigation, his situation is a separate family matter. If Meghan had reasons to protect her children, that is one issue. It does not erase seven years of public accusations, interviews, documentaries and grievances directed at the Royal Family.
For years, we were given a different account of the estrangement. There were the staged paparazzi photographs, the media cooperation and the private letter that became the subject of a privacy lawsuit. In the 2021 Oprah interview, Meghan spoke about having “lost” her father as part of the cost of becoming a royal. In the Netflix series, Harry said he shouldered the blame because “if Meg wasn’t with me, then her dad would still be her dad.”
Those were the explanations presented to the public.
Now, with new allegations emerging, we are being served a fresh narrative of maternal protection and long-overdue vindication. So why are journalists not pressing harder on the timeline, the earlier explanations and what the public was told at the time?
And why is The Sun working overtime to push this story from allegations against Thomas Markle into a broader rehabilitation of Meghan’s image? Reporting the developments is one thing. Turning them into a redemption arc is quite another.
There is also an uncomfortable question surrounding Meghan’s public advocacy for children’s safety and online privacy. If she was aware of serious allegations involving children from 2018 onwards, how does that timeline sit alongside her public campaigning? That is a legitimate question, not an accusation of wrongdoing.
Most importantly, what does any of this have to do with her treatment of the Royal Family?
The Oprah interview still happened. The Netflix series still happened. The public accusations, the repeated airing of private grievances and the damage to family relationships do not disappear because a disturbing new story has emerged about her father.
You can sympathise with a family estrangement without absolving someone of everything else. You can take allegations seriously without pretending every criticism of Meghan was unjustified.
The journalists pushing this vindication narrative need to explain why a private family matter is being used to reassess an entirely separate public record.
Meghan’s relationship with her father does not rewrite the last eight years. And it certainly does not give her a clean slate.
Sympathy is not vindication. Stop confusing the two.
This is soo degrading
Meghan Markle and @MattSunRoyal belong in jail. Here is Mr Thomas Markle getting out of a massive operation still groggy and that's when meghan sent in cameras to deliver a letter to humiliate him even more. She WARNED HIM about the investigation, IN SPITE that she claims she was told to keep silent
Nessmines retweeted
That’s the last @thetimes ‘Royal Read’ from you in this house. Your stories are always skewed against the working royals. That ‘hot mess’ in the Caribbean was created by the biased reporting of many of you Royal reporters, and you have no knowledge of whom the Commonwealth may choose as its leader in future. Meanwhile Sussex leaks to you are treated like gospel, even when they’ve more holes than crochet. Just listened to you on @TimesRadio. ‘Royal Editor’ indeed. You now edit Royal stories to suit your bias, and omit details that don’t fit your narrative. Unfollow me please @RoyaNikkah I’ll be turning off the radio whenever you’re on.
Nessmines retweeted
I'm so bloody sick of this case being turned into yet another fucking PR exercise.
Having followed the statements from Meghan, her spokesperson, the Metropolitan Police and the journalists covering the allegations against Thomas Markle, I find the direction of this story increasingly troubling.
Let us establish what we actually know.
The Metropolitan Police confirmed receiving a letter in January 2019 containing allegations of offences allegedly committed outside the United Kingdom. The letter was sent to its Protection Command because it raised concerns about the Duchess of Sussex's security.
The Met reviewed it and decided to pass it to the Sussexes' office. It also confirmed that the allegations were not shared with other law enforcement agencies.
Crucially, the Met has stated that it neither previously investigated Thomas Markle nor is currently investigating him.
Yet we were initially told that Meghan had been shown the letter in the summer of 2018, that it explained her estrangement from her father, and that she had received assurances that the allegations were being investigated.
Following the police statement, the timeline was corrected to January 2019. Her spokesperson has attributed the discrepancy to the passage of time and an understandable lapse of memory.
I find that explanation difficult to reconcile with the extraordinary level of detail Harry and Meghan have devoted to documenting their personal history.
We have heard about lip gloss, bridesmaids' dresses, tiaras, Nottingham Cottage, family disagreements, private conversations, press disputes and royal tours. These events have been revisited through interviews, books and documentaries, often with remarkable precision.
Yet the timing of a letter containing allegations serious enough to supposedly influence a major family estrangement is now something nobody can accurately recall?
More importantly, Meghan's estrangement from her father began before January 2019. If this letter is being presented as the reason for that estrangement, journalists should establish what she knew before then, how she knew it and what independent evidence supports that chronology.
And what about the alleged assurances of an investigation?
Who provided them? When? Which authority was supposedly investigating?
The Met's statement does not corroborate those assurances. That does not establish that Meghan deliberately misled anyone, but it certainly warrants further questioning.
Which brings me to the journalists.
Chris Ship, Roya Nikkhah, Matt Wilkinson and others have reported details attributed to sources or documents that the public cannot independently examine.
I am not suggesting that sensitive material involving potential child victims should be published. Quite the opposite.
But journalists who claim to have examined the letter should be able to explain what they have verified about its date, provenance and transmission, and clearly distinguish those findings from statements supplied by the Sussexes or their representatives.
A document containing allegations does not establish their truth. Nor does confirming that a letter existed independently verify someone's explanation of their personal decisions.
Reporting what a spokesperson says is journalism. Establishing whether that account is supported by evidence is also journalism.
And those two responsibilities should not be confused.
I am not alleging that these journalists are coordinating their coverage. But the repeated presentation of similar claims, followed by a significant chronological correction, makes independent scrutiny all the more necessary.
Now to the issue that troubles me most.
There is an investigation in the Philippines involving allegations of child sexual abuse material.
Those allegations are extraordinarily serious. Thomas Markle denies wrongdoing, and his guilt or innocence must be determined through a proper legal process.
Nessmines retweeted
🚨🚨 Just got off the phone with Tarrant County election insiders who broke down what is becoming a five-alarm warning: Democrats are outvoting Republicans here.
For perspective, Tarrant is the last large red urban county in America. It is GROUND ZERO for flipping Texas. While Tarrant has more registered Republicans than Democrats, Ds have done a better job of turnout than Rs for the last several elections. REMINDER: In 2018 Beto beat Cruz in Tarrant by over 4k votes.
I am told that even though Ds typically outperform Rs in early voting, the reduced percentage of Rs early voting against Ds at this point signals a major warning.
Texas will be lost if Republicans don’t vote.
Make sure EVERYONE you know votes. There is no greater priority right now.
The people I spoke with are solid officials who are not prone to sounding the alarm unnecessarily, so this is a legitimately serious issue. 🚨🚨
Nessmines retweeted
Remember when black women were calling him “Christopher Jamal Evans”, then black women got upset that as a white man, he married a white woman.
I certainly remember.
Nessmines retweeted
Ain’t no way this is real life 😂
A whole stranger at Sam’s Club overheard her asking her husband what he wanted for dinner and decided to pull up and tell her to divorce him.
Because cooking for your man after work is apparently oppression now.
The look of disgust on that woman’s face when she said “I actually love cooking for him” to me is like she just admitted to a crime.
Then the stranger hits her with “you’re making men too comfortable.” Sis... if your husband paying the bills ain’t “fathering” you, then cooking dinner ain’t “mothering” him. The double standard is crazy.
People really out here hating on happy marriages in the grocery store. Wild times.
Who else has had a random person insert themselves into y’all’s relationship like this? Be honest.
WHO gave her those assurances?
Nessmines retweeted
Thanks for this much needed light fun entertainment timeline cleanse.
Prince William is pretty funny and bet he would look good in a police uniform 🔥
I'm going to karaoke and drinks with friends and looking forward to this when I get back.
Nessmines retweeted
Today, a story broke that Thomas Markle jr, Meghan's brother, called the police and the British press to denounce his own father as a pedophile.
Today, on the same day this story is publicly announced in the British press, Meghan has a statement at the ready claiming that she has known since 2018, conveniently before her wedding, that her dad was a pedophile WHEN the Met police alerted her of an ANONYMOUS letter, they conveniently received in 2018, right before the royal wedding, about Thomas Markle.
Today, the Metropolitan Police responded that they are not currently investigating Thomas Markle over allegations he possessed indecent images of children, nor have they previously investigating him since they do not recall any letter being sent to them on this matter in 2018, nor do they recall ever passing information to Meghan about her father in 2018🔥
This is another PR stunt, another attempt at attention by Meghan Markle, this pathological liar who is always caught lying.
If there is a letter that was ever sent to the Met police in 2018, then Meghan was the only one who had motive, means and would have benefited from this letter in order to use it as a reason to justify NOT inviting her father to her own wedding. She wrote that letter accusing her own father of pedophilia👌🏽
Meghan did not want him nor ANY other family members at her royal wedding, at the exception of her conniving and grifting mother Doria, who covers for her numerous lies. Why? Because she feared her family would embarrass her and expose the truth about the fake PR image she has fabricated to lie to Harry and the RF in order to infiltrate their midst.
Yes, Meghan has gone to great lengths in 2018 to prevent her father from ever meeting the RF and Harry. It is because she has gone to desperate lengths to exclude her father that I know for a fact that This entire story of pedophilia is a convenient set up🔥
Walk with me down memory lane...
• It was Jason Knauff, chief of communication of KP at the time, who exposed in High court, the emails correspondence between meghan and him, where she was planning to set up her own father by writing a "letter to daddy" that she would conveniently leak to the press, to "pull at public's heartstrings", all the while accusing her father of leaking it.
The goal was to use this reason to cut off her father and effectively ban him from her life and royal wedding, while blaming him as the reason and painting herself as the victim.
So she wrote wrote a five-page letter, in Calligraphy no less, and sent it to her father and leaked a copy to People magazine of all magazines and the daily mail, of all newspapers😏
In her letter, she NEVER mentioned any pedophilia or abuse as the reason why she cut off her father. She actually mentioned the most selfish, vain and childish reason why she no longer want a relationship with him: she blames him for betraying her by giving interviews and staging photos that she felt embarrassed her.
THAT is why meghan cut off her father out of her life, NOT pedophilia she has known since 2018, but because he did EXACTLY what meghan likes to do, give interviews, leak to the press and stage paparazzi photos; this is the crime that to meghan, Thomas has commited🤡
There was NEVER any story of pedophilia ever mentioned, until today. DO the math🤷🏽♀️
Another very telling proof that Meghan is lying is that back in 2018, the entire RF and Harry still expected her to invite her father to the Wedding. Thus, Meg had to invent the most desperate lie she could to convince Harry. And Dim Harry, wrote that embarrassing lie in Spare, exposing it to the world.
In Spare, Harry accused Thomas Markle of abandoning his daughter at the altar and being a bad father because Meghan had told him that she had invited her father to the wedding, and even booked a flight for her father on "Air New Zealand, first class, booked and paid for by Meghan, from Mexico to UK".😵💫
Well my dears, that massive lie was exposed when the Airline itself tweeted, right after this lie was published in Spare that " Air New Zealand has NEVER operated flights between those 2 countries."🔥😂
I am asking you, if truly Thomas was a pedophile and that Meg had known all along, WHY would meghan need to invent such LIES when she had the perfect excuse all along?
She wouldn't. Meg's own desperate actions are the proof that this entire story about the anonymous letter and the pedophilia is MADE UP by BOTH Meghan and her grifter of a brother.🔥
In 2025 when her father was amputated, Meg went through a circus and lied that she had been in communication with him, and checked on him, which was exposed as a lie by Samantha Markle. Then she lied she emailed him instead because she could not find a flight to the Philippines, absolute poppycock.
Again, WHY would meg need to make up ALL these lies, if she could simply say he is a pedophile which is the perfect ammunition against him?
Meghan LOVE to be the victim, she CRAVES public support and attention. WHY would she have sat on such a big story that could gain her support?
Very simple. there is no story, Thomas lives in the Philippines. The one crime that is pervasive in the Philippines is child pornography, so that is the bandwagon she and tom jnr hopped on.
Meghan Markle is a LIAR, a manipulator and she is a malevolent.
Her actions NEVER match her words becaue all she does is lie and attempt to detroy the lives of the people she envied the most or the ones she feel are in her way. She did that to the RF, she did that to the Wales and their marriage, she did that to her own father, and eventually she will do that to Harry🔥
Well and so, stop troubling yourselves with these gimmicks for press attention. Knowing the Truth in every scandal and drama surrounding meghan is very simple: the Truth is ALWAYS the opposite of whatever meghan is saying☕️
#MeghanMarkleisALiar
Nessmines retweeted
It's subtle, but with a trained eye, you can detect a slight difference between the way that The New York Times Editorial Board is treating the accusations against Ilhan Nur Said Elmi (aka Ilhan Omar) and the way they treated the accusations against Donald Trump.
Nessmines retweeted
If an unmarried men has 2 baby mamas, you people will never send your kid to visit the other baby mama because you don't care about "siblings having a relationship". It only becomes an issue when a man is married because the point is to stick it to the wife
