Megan Narcle … gone radio silent. All of her jibber-jabber about her lawsuit and not being supported by the Palace, re: “If this was happening to Kate the palace would react…but not for me blah, blah, blah. Maybe she knew all along about the Tatler article from Jessica M. and that is why she kept going on about it.
She probably is very pleased with herself as the Palaces’ reaction reinforces MM’s position. Possibly she knew the vitriol that was going to spill out from that article, and ultimately the reaction was going to be strong. Therefore, radio silent as of late.
The “See, I told you the Palace will stick up for Kate”. Not a surprisingly observant comment since she probably already knew from her own sources what was going into the story on Kate in Tatler. So the more she said the Palace never spoke up for me, their reaction just confirmed her belief, which she expected it would. Still, I am surprised the Palace and that the Cambridges did react.
I, for one, am glad that Tatler sources will be scrutinized by an IPSO review. It also puts everyone on notice out there like the Narcles and their sources, if you put out these vague references of “Sources”…”friends of “… this kind of thing, you will have IPSO reviews and the resulting damages to pay, or lawsuits on your hands. Add to that, lies and inaccuracies of such magnitude that you completely distort any objectivity, because your focus is only on, i.e. body shaming of a woman, sexism, negative family relationships, you have sent a poor message to the female reader of your magazine. Compounding their errors, they are messing with William, and his reaction is not going to be any day at the beach.
The Narcs and their ilk may not pay in the short term, but Narckles long term payday will be very much diminished once William gets his hands on the Duchy. They will regret it because William will never forget it or forgive them. I can confirm these theories as I was told them by a very “skilled craftsman”…and you know what an accurate source they have always been.
I just love your posts! Yep, I hear you on the sources, they can be trusted. This situation fits in nicely with divorce if we can get Harry back in the UK.
Meghan Markle has always been a hit and runs asshole leaving everyone else holding the bag. I’m really looking forward to this one happening. Glee
Meghan is a fake claiming she loves women, no she doesn’t she hates them. If she did love them why would she treat her sister-in-law like shit!
I’m as surprised as you are that the palace handled this, it usually don’t complain and don’t explain. I think they know who did it and this their way of telling the hoe bag, we know.
We thank you very much, and keep on bringing them!
Suffice it to say…Anna is no Boris. Boris Pasternak, the real writer in the family must be turning over in his grave. So must all the other highly accomplished rellies with the Pasternak name. We have here the one who cannot let go of the Pasternak name (even through two husbands).
This present article of hers in “Tatler/Tattle” on the DofC reflects a pathetic attempt, as in the past (one chapter of the James Hewitt book should put it to rest) to ride the coattails of Anna’s other famous and accomplished relatives. Anna got into Oxford, probably on the back of this family name and its connections. Oxford should ask for their diploma back if this is the level of competency their program produces after 4 years.
This is writing of an uneducated, incompetent pseudo writer who should never have been admitted to any school of that caliber. Anna Pastyourneck’s ” work” showcases the fact that she has no real writing talent; she is, what in America we would call a “Hack writer”. By way of background, a “Hack” is a person hired by editors for their own purposes. Usually, a hack job, a “gun for hire” (in this case Anna) is one that mutilates a routine storyline of old facts to make it commercial for a re-issue of an old story, but a new assignment. The storyline usually is one that this Editor (in this case Dick Dineen) directed or outlined for (in this case, Anna, our ” Hack”) as to how they want the storyline to unfold. The “Hack” knowingly obfuscates, with the Editors backing, for money (which I understand Anna needs). The “Hack” creates fictional or distorted facts in an attempt to make the subject more outrageous or distasteful to the reader, thereby building up interest in the storyline in the magazine.
This “Hack”, Anna, apparently in line with her professional standards, did not see this as an assignment that she personally found unacceptable. One might almost say she pursues the Duchess’s profile in a very negative, almost gleeful way. The way the homely girl in High School hated the Prom Queen and feverishly portrays her as a slut to anyone who will listen. The darkness in her writing appears to flow very easily from Anna. It all comes across as so personal. Anna, the Hack, does go further than I have seen from the British press in the past.
Anna injected the unexpected; the bile and vitriol, and that took it beyond personally vicious and made it savagely aggressive. It has been made public that our little miss pastyourneck was in therapy (anger therapy?), and while there, engaged in an affair with the therapist, one Andrew Wallas. She divorced her husband for Mr. Wallas and they later married (I also understand she has daughter issues with their child).
Mr. Wallas, in my opinion, cannot be a very good therapist if this is the outcome his therapy produces. Clearly, if she was seeing a therapist, she possibly felt a fraud as a writer. Anna’s lack of success because she never measured up to the successes of Great Uncle Boris and Uncle Leopold etc. , would compound clear anger management issues, that she never measured up in the eyes of the world. Clearly, she is not cured of whatever it was that brought her to him. So maybe, you might want to bypass this one therapist, as I do not think we are talking great success in treating patients (or was too much time spent diddling each other during the sessions ).
The strands of all her personal issues are woven through the slant of this story on the Duchess of Cambridge. I would like to add however, I do not believe Megan Narcle was as involved as it has been noted. I think she was involved in parts, but I would like to think she does not have that kind of influence.
With Jessica Mulrooney probably being deposed (in the People magazine issue on TM) in the Court case of Megans , and the overall social destruction she has done to the Mulrooney name in Canadien circles, politically and socially. Her image is toast. I do think a well-placed story by Megan to Jess or the ear of someone who would pass it along is evident.
These weaknesses in a writer, attached to an editor of minimal , notable skill , especially one guiding the narrative, can only result in a sham piece. We all know a sham is something that is purported to be genuine, and this piece clearly is not. I presume when you are not concerned with real research and fact-checking in your writing, a hack/Anna produces for easy money, so the hack could probably could knock this piece out on her porch mid- COVID.
In this present case, this issue, along with a promotional offer they extended free molton brown with a $1 subscription offer attached to magazine. This therefore is the story to now learn from. The 15 yr. old editor’s own words to the public were “I am obsessed with Megan”. What real editor, of a real magazine, that once enjoyed a popular status, with a very specific readership would risk that readership by making a statement like that. Mr. Dick Dineen gives himself no sense of self-worth with his foolish and ridiculous “obsessed” statement, nor does he give his magazine (Conde Nast you are on notice!) any standing in that world anymore.
This article, his endorsement of it , his support of his writer (I cannot call her an author) via his position is devalued daily with this. Mr. Dineen’s Megan obsessed comment and subsequent over the top, unnatural interest in her and her antics is an insult to all real writers and real editors who present legitimate, factual, interesting, observant, even witty portrayals of public people and events.
With the present birth of those in the publishing orbit, this editor, Dick D. , Omid Scobie, and their ilk, the idea that the public have not nourished their own personal standards of what is acceptable must be made clear. The insinuation we all share a grammar school intellect and look to this as real writing, well, I guess the former subscribers can cancel, and newsstand readers of this rag (an old tabloid term as well) need to stop buying it, and the Internet needs to have Tattle pull it. This group who are referred by Tatler/Tattle regularly as the main readership of this magazine, are the aristocracy. If that is so, the Aristocracy need to examine what they want to read, because this is trash by any measurement of reading material. Going forward, having Tatler/Tattle on your coffee table will say more about you than you realize.
Thank you anon! Great read and I agree with you!
Hawley destroys Rod, Rod crumbles! pic.twitter.com/v1offSloDg
— 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗮𝗱𝗼𝗿 ♿ (@theconservador) June 3, 2020
The chief of the Richmond, Virginia, police department told reporters Sunday that Black Lives Matter and antifa rioters set fire to a multi-family home with children inside and then blocking access for firefighters to get through to save the children.
St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner released ALL of the rioters and looters captured this week in the criminal Black Lives Matter – Antifa protests in St. Louis. This was after 4 police officers were shot and one retired police captain was killed in the street on Facebook live. Missouri state Attorney General Eric Schmitt…
Please note that this was so well organized that they had Medics in the field, ammunition (skids of bricks, bats, poles), and lawyers ready at the jails. Antifa was paying people to throw bricks and Molotov cocktails.
We know Soros, Clinton and Brock were behind this. We suspect members of congress also knew. It’s going to be hell to pay because the group was infiltrated.
I look forward to federal charges to come soon.
- US_based Christina Oxenberg, 57, has spoken out in new documentary
- Claims Ghislaine Maxwell felt ‘no guilt’ in procuring girls for Jeffrey Epstein
- Maria farmer reveals she ‘feared for her life’ at the hands of Epstein and Maxwell
- Who Killed Jeffrey Epstein? premieres at 11pm Saturday 6th June on Quest Red and dplay