Updated: 4 February 2020
One of the promises I made when I started down this road of uncovering Meghan Markle's "hypocrisy" was to keep shining the light on Bogart, the lovable mixed breed dog that Markle dumped to become Princess Diana 2.0. Of course, she could not achieve her grandiose delusion because afterall, Meghan Markle is NO Princess Diana -- far from it.
Here where countless Aussie animals are losing their homes, Markle is complaining about paparazzi in Canada camped outside their Vancouver Island home. Once again the 'former' royals are threatening to sue the media. The most recent photos of her walking Guy and a mysterious black dog were taken in public. Will Markle sue everyone who takes pictures of her in public?
A recent post on the 'former' royals' Instagram feed, is a picture of Markle (below) during a visit to Mayhew Animal Shelter in London. It appears quite 'ironic' that Markle was appointed Patron of an animal shelter where they rehome dogs and cats. Let's not forget how she dumped her mixed breed dog, Bogart in Canada BUT brought her purebred beagle, Guy, instead. Markle is NO PATRON of animals -- far from it. Markle is a patron of Meghan Markle!
♕ Defender-in-Chief ♛
Updated: 4 February 2020
Another "Much A Do About Nothing" BROUHAHA is heating up the air waves. The Meghan Markle RABID fans and their WOKE CLAN are again blaming British Media for being "chiefly" responsible for the departure of the Sussexes. It appears in this 'WOKE' nation, no one, it seems, takes any accountability or responsibility for their own actions. Blame it on 'RACISM' and blame the media, they whine!
I think we are ALL waiting for evidentiary facts of the RACIST media coverage on Meghan Markle. All they could produce is a BuzzFeed article with mundane mentions of Avocados, belly rubs and poisonous wedding bouquets. They point to Canada and North America citing the 'respectability' of their media. Obviously, these people have never lived in 'Hollywood America.'
The fact of the matter is that Meghan Markle was a virtual "Nobody" before she started dating Prince Henry. I have never heard of her at all until the November 2017 interview with the BBC. She wasn't even on my radar until a colleague pointed her out and said she was dating Prince Henry. My initial reaction was that I hope Prince Henry found a good woman.
I have never watched Suits because it just wasn't my cuppa tea. I am more a Forensic Files and Criminal Minds viewer. I saw Meghan Markle on one Hallmark Channel movie. Other than that, I just wasn't interested at all in her personal or entertainment lives, until that infamous BBC interview.
The way I felt about her before the BBC interview was in line with what many media was thinking at the time. She just wasn't a BIG DEAL. She was a cable actress, not in the SAME calibre as Halle Berry, Angelina Jolie or Jennifer Aniston. She was even less known than Lacey Chabert, a Hallmark Veteran, who consistently rates in the top 500 on IMDb.
Meghan Markle's RABID AND 'WOKE' sycophants can claim otherwise, but facts don't lie. They can spin the story of this "successful" actress, but what has she done...REALLY? Here is a list of her filmography on IMDb. Meghan Markle can also thank her FIRST HUSBAND, Trevor Engelson for helping her secure some of these bit parts.
The claim to fame is not even Suits, it's her marriage to Prince Henry of Wales. Now she is using her new found 'notoriety' for personal gain. I guess the stories of her wanting to go to Britain to 'bag a wealthy Brit' is all coming to fruition.
♕ Defender-in-Chief ♛
Updated 23 January 2020 - added Halle Berry, less I am accused of "racism" 😉
BuzzFeed has gone completely MENTAL with their latest dredging of the pond.
In the 13 January 2020 report by Ellie Hall, she claims twenty (20) news media headlines that unfavourably compare Meghan Markle to the Duchess of Cambridge, for "basically" doing the "same" things. Here is another case of people who know nothing about how to create a PREMISE for their ARGUMENT. In reading the articles and comparisons, the articles were written by different reporters, except one, with different cultural perspectives and styles, written in a different political/socio-economic climate AND are not even the same articles. In essence, BuzzFeed had created a "Much a do about nothing" scenario for their own interests.
It is very likely, and has been done many times, that ANYONE can make the same comparisons that could negatively reflect the Duchess of Cambridge whilst elevating Meghan Markle. The nonsense notion that Meghan Markle is negatively reported upon in the media whilst the Duchess of Cambridge is "sainted" for doing the same thing is utterly ridiculous and a WEAK point.
How soon EVERYONE who makes these comparisons forget that the Duchess of Cambridge, nee Catherine Middleton, was a point of jokes and ridicule by the media not so long ago. People who prefer to write these type of HIT PIECES want to hide their REAL reasons for doing so. Let's not be deceived by the elephant in the room, "RACISM," the mud that is flung by many Meghan Markle sycophants and RABID fan base if anyone dares to negatively criticise her.
Take for example the case of the "competing" intellectual property rights. The difference lies in how the Cambridges handled this process and what the Sussexes are doing now. It is NOT WRONG to protect your image for no monetary gain and if you read the process by the Cambridges, any person with half a brain would understand what they did. The Sussexes on the other hand, are trademarking their names for future book deals, television rights and merchandising to earn money. THAT is the difference. When Prince Henry trademarked his name around the time of the Cambridges, not one cried fowl. But, together with this wife, Meghan Markle, they are looking for an INDEPENDENT means to earn money now that thankfully, the British taxpayers don't have to foot the bill. They started the trademark process in 2019, which should give EVERYONE a clue and a "headsup" to their motives as well as to their "mindset."
♕ Defender-in-Chief ♛
We live in a world that is divided by politics, religion, race, sexual orientation and gender. Even people with disabilities are attacked for being who they are -- people. Nowhere are the attacks more vicious than on social media.
Since opening the Twitter account in 2008, I lived a relatively peaceful existence. I am on Facebook too, but use Twitter more because it is easier, in my opinion, to connect and less cumbersome than Facebook. Twitter is my "Go to" social medium. It was not until the last six months where I became more involved on social media with the issues plaguing our country.
Politics is a strange bed fellow because it divides families and even best of friends. I always strive to stay in the middle as much as possible, but at times, I too have stepped out of bounds and tweeted how I felt. Why not? This is the United States. Even in Canada and Britain, you are allowed FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION. In the United States they have the First Amendment.
Unfortunately, voicing your opinion about an issue or someone who is a public figure can get quite heated. I have been the brunt of many comments, BUT I took things in stride, never ruffled, but always respectful. It is in the spirit of respectability that I allow ALL voices to enter my Twitter feeds. I don't care if you love Donald Trump or hate him; or you are Republican or Democrat. What I do care about is LANGUAGE.
Today, we launched our Anti-bullying campaign. I did so because I was moved by one Twitter user's account of what happened to her for expressing her opinion about a particular subject she was passionate about. She is also a blue star daughter. Her father is a Veteran and we in the military support each other. The twitter BULLY, Suzanne Soto, we discovered work in communications of all jobs, for Deloitte Canada. It really amazes us that people who should know their place in the respectability order are some of the most vicious, not only attacking the tweets, but also the person.
Therefore, we start with Suzanne Soto, our 'poster BULLY' and will add more as we continue this campaign.
♕ "Defender-in-Chief" ♛
Where do we begin? In the latest development, we find none other than Piers Morgan weighing in about Meghan Markle's so called "Humanitarian" profile. In his latest article posted to the Daily Mail, Morgan states, "If you’re truly a humanitarian, Meghan, then show some damn heart to your loving father before he succumbs to a broken one." He goes on to say, "We know this because she never stops telling us."
In theatre, we call this INDICATING, when the ACTOR is telling the audience what s/he is doing, instead of just doing the action - just like the "Three card monty" game I mentioned in my 19 May 2018 address on the NEBULOUS DUCHESS.
Here is Mr. Morgan's full cover story below. Please click on the image to be taken to the site.
ORIGINAL: 19 MAY 2018
I preface THIS page by stating, I do not trust this "NEBULOUS DUCHESS." You can read more about the reasons in the Q&A section.
I do not make judgments based on people's looks, albeit there is a higher expectation for "Royal" peerage. I make them based on their actions and their words. As a society, we fail to see beyond the "superficial." We have this "halo-effect" around certain people that makes us blind and indifferent to what is right in front of us. I believe she is playing a three card monty on us. She distracts us to look elsewhere -- 'Hey here I am an humanitarian and feminist' -- so that we forget she just traded these values in for a "gilded cage."
Personally, I felt strange that the ONLY family she had at her wedding was her mum, who looked fabulous, by the by. Whilst her family antics would give anyone "heart burn," they are still family and part of her roots. It is interesting that she dumped her early LA connections for the celebrity and the clothes, shoes and accessories that she could only dream of owning as a "starving actress." There were no friends from college years, either. Most of the "friends" she acquired, interestingly, are "celebrities" and "socialites." At least HRH The Duchess of Cambridge invited the immigrant grocers from her village to be included as wedding guests.
The ex-husband, whom she dumped, gave her bit parts in his film when she was a total unknown in the world of entertainment. Once she acquired her new found fame on 'Suits," she said good-bye to Trevor in the most callus of ways. She returned her marriage bands via certified post! In addition, her "Royal biography" mentions her internship at the US Embassy in Buenos Aires, Argentina. She acquired that position through her uncle who was a retired U.S. Diplomat. He was also NOT invited to the wedding. This Nebulous Duchess, it appears, does not want to remember her roots or to thank those who helped her along the way.
I truly wish the best for HRH The Duke of Sussex. He deserves such happiness. He grew up into a fine man doing good in the world and lifting the stigma of mental illness. I just can't shake the fact he picked the "wrong" wife.
♕ "Defender-in-Chief" ♛
♕ The Defender-in-Chief ♛ remarks on Meghan Markle expanded coverage
ORIGINAL: 12 JUNE 2018
GB/Media has received an unusually high demand for Meghan Markle coverage, since her nuptial to The Duke of Sussex. A great majority of this request has come from well-respected Royalists and Monarchists who want to uphold the traditions of the Royal Family -- understandably so. Interestingly, we were also contacted by several UK Republicans.
The Royal Family is a subject we have NEVER covered and most likely this trend would have continued IF NOT for the "debacle" that was the "Meghan Markle engagement interview." You can view the The Spotlight for more information about the reason we went against our own grain to cover The Royals. Are the public still in the "honeymoon phase?" Yes. Does the main stream media have a "halo-effect" around Meghan Markle? Definitely. Is a person's past behaviours a pre-cursor to future events? You BET! We are witnessing that RIGHT NOW.
Whilst many in the media have called Meghan Markle Sussex a "breath of fresh air" and fawning over her every move, they have forgotten one very IMPORTANT FACT. The Royal Family's ACE is NOT Meghan Markle Sussex or The Duchess of Cambridge, but Queen Elizabeth II. Her popularity has been on the rise and even some staunch UK Republicans still respect the Queen. Whilst she may be popular, the Royal Family as a "collective unit" are not. Thus, the Queen is the glue that is holding this family together.
Another IMPORTANT FACT of British life is the "shift" in the way Britons now speak. They use a contemporary version of RP. Traditional RP, "Queen's English" and BBC English is used by only a small percentage of the population, usually the "upper crust," the Queen's generation or those who wish to sound more "posh."
Let us not kid ourselves here, and here I speak about the Americans. I am an American too, who was bred to understand the art of refinement, decorum, etiquette AND protocol (political and royal) within the confines of a British structure. Whilst the American spirit is "carefree" and likes to take risks, the British culture has "unwritten" rules that should be respected, such as "queuing."
Whilst Americans enjoy the spectacle that is all things Royal, the British taxpayers pay for your enjoyment. So, please do remember that. So, the question remains, why should British taxpayers pay for someone who will not respect their traditions? Why marry into the Royal Family, if you are going to do your own thing? As stated earlier, a "person's past behaviours are a pre-cusor to future events."
Related - The Cultural Attaché
♕ The "Defender-in-Chief ♛
All Acting ATXFestival Bogart Dog Catherine Middleton Christine Evangelista Deloitte Canada Duchess Of Cambridge Duchess Of Sussex Feminist Gilded Cage Humanitarian Meghan Markle Nebulous Duchess Piers Morgan Prince Henry Race Royal Biography Suits Suzanne Soto Thomas Markle Jr.
Webmaster | Tools
Briefs | Enquires
T.E.A.M. | Resources
Meghan Markle Archive
Legal | Profile