66 Comments

Oh. You have nailed the Duchess of Monticito.

Her "job is to be, not to do".

She and her husband are a complete waste of space.

Expand full comment

Very cruel reply.

Expand full comment

Not if its true...Which it is. The reality is, both the prince and princes of Montecito are publicity junkies looking for their next hit of attention.

Expand full comment

Why do you care? Just stop reading about them. William and Kate are on the news all the time. Do you care about the their publicity. If people mineded their own business and let people do what they do without judgement. It doesn’t hurt you. It’s cruel.

Expand full comment

Uhhh, you do know this is a comments section...Don't you? That people will post their opinion about the article...Right? So, if it's so important to you that we should, "Just stop reading about them..." Therefore not commenting on them. Maybe you should take your own advice and stop reading my posts.

Because if you minded your own business you wouldn't get your panties in a bunch over what people wrote about the prince and princes of Montecito.

Expand full comment

In the great movie THE BAREFOOT CONTESSA, the character of a pretender king and his American wife--surely meant to suggest the Duke and Duchess of Windsor--flop around the European Riviera, holding meaningless court in restaurants with actors, celebrities, and general riffraff. In a moment of clarity, the non-king bitterly compares himself to a popular nobleman played by Rossano Brazzi: "Among counts, he is a king; among kings, I am a . . ." I can never remember the exact ending of the quote. Is it "joke"? "fool"? Or does he just trail off, leaving us to supply a logical epithet?

Expand full comment

This is gold, Tanya ;) South Park wrecked Meghan and Harry with the worldwide privacy tour. “Where rank materialism meets bogus activism” - that describes the fake duchess and her target market perfectly: the American Democrat sanctimonious coastal elite luxury belief class.

I predict Markel will hire our stunning and brave national youth poet laureate for the American Riviera Orchard launch party like Biden did for his inauguration: https://yuribezmenov.substack.com/p/youth-poet-laureate-commissar-amanda-gorman

Expand full comment

Markle is an empty vessel. Which ever way the wind is blowing is where you will find her. And Harry, he’ll be clutching her skirt and whinging about how hard his life has been. Pathetic, the both of them.

Expand full comment

She 9 million in the bank when Harry met her, she had a college degree, a townhouse in Canada. Was working on a hit TV show.

Expand full comment

Give it a rest, Maryanne. How do you know she had $9 million in the bank? How do you know what her taxes were, what she spent, and on and on. And she was not the star of Suits, which was an ensemble show. As for her condo - Harry had the use of palaces. Morever, as a young member of the Royal Family, he was met with deference and respect everywhere he went. That isn't true in America. We don't show deference of that type to anyone. Furthermore, just being the King's son isn't cause for respect over here. I imagine Harry is suffering from culture shock.

Expand full comment

Hey sug

Expand full comment

"Markle is an empty vessel."

Truer words were never spoken, Ami. Word has it that the Royal Vessel was empty during the nine or so months before the littlest prince and princess drew their very first breaths. Allegedly. That's why although we are bombarded with zillions of photos of the H&M Harkles, there are almost no photos of the genuinely adorable Riviera Royal tots who are officially 7th and 8th in the line of succession to the British throne.

And then what are we to make of all those photos of the shape-shifting Royal Baby Bumps. Bumps whose inflation, deflation, and gravity-defying movements (up, down, and all around) rival those reported by Navy pilot David Fravor in his Congressional testimony on UFOs.

Allegedly. Allegedly. Allegedly.

Expand full comment

I am so grateful the Free Press exists, to publish articles such as the one today which held the New York Times’ feet to the fire for its reporting on Hamas. This is extremely important journalism.

It was immediately followed by the most baffling article I’ve ever seen in the Free Press— a scandal rag piece, whose only purpose, as far as I can tell, was to be mean to a woman for starting a home goods company.

What on earth were you thinking?

Here’s the breakdown of the article:

1st Paragraph — accuses the woman of being a prostitute (“in the business of selling herself.”).

2nd— makes fun of the name of her new business.

3rd— accuses the woman of liking beautiful things because she herself is not beautiful.

4th— asserts that a promotional video of the woman stirring a pot in the kitchen for her new home goods company, is fundamentally sinister to the history of… England? Humanity? America? It’s not clear. It’s just sinister.

5th— makes fun of the woman for being biracial and implies that because of that she does not belong in a nice place like “an Orchard by the sea in America.”

6th— accuses the woman of being shallow and selfish because… No reason is given.

7th— claims that the woman’s identity makes it impossible for her to actually want to pursue good in the world.

8th— claims that the woman’s act of marrying a man she loved was slimy and despicable.

9th— Asserts a wish that the woman’s new business fails and that people laugh at her.

This is the worst sort of British tabloid slush. It’s just mean. And it serves no purpose, other than to imply that Meghan Markle merely existing and living her life, while her sister-in-law is having medical difficulties, is somehow unconscionable.

Why did the Free Press publish this?

Expand full comment

Thank you! Honestly, why publish this? It’s not what I pay for. It’s not what I rely on The FP for. It’s trashy and dumb. I do love some trash now and then but not in The FP for cryin out loud. I get my trash for free.

Expand full comment

First off, Meghan is a public figure, scrutiny by the public is part of the deal. One can’t crave attention and then complain when the coverage doesn’t match their expectations.

Second, Meghan trashed the royals and she should accept pushback from people with a different opinion. Glass houses.

Third, people just don’t like her.

Expand full comment

And Four, she is probably gonna run for office in her glorious mind

Expand full comment

Then don't read this article. One look at the front page of the site shows there are plenty more articles of substance.

Expand full comment

You've missed my entire point. But that's okay.

Expand full comment

Sometimes I think this free press is just like the Sun in England.

Leave her alone every one wish her luck in her new endeavors. For her sake and her children.

Expand full comment

This sounds suspiciously as if written by a member of Meghan's staff ... I'm sure they're on the watch for any articles on her or Harry.

Expand full comment

Indeed. Change the "C" to an "R" and the "I" to an "E," and what have you got. M. Markle.

Expand full comment

The editor

While Ms Gold’s piece is mildly amusing I would request that you spike all such stories in the future. Any media coverage only encourages them to continue their self absorbed behaviour designed mostly to be nasty to the Royal family. Please,ignore them.

Expand full comment

Archwell, American Riviera, etc. Well then, let’s see it! It’s always a logo and an announcement, but never any stuff. Where’s the beef?

Expand full comment

Word salad indeed.

Expand full comment
founding

“which sounds like an address given by an immigrant to a taxi driver, asking to be taken to paradise.”

I died laughing.

Expand full comment

Not a pig. Just a simple-minded opportunist. She seems to be failing miserably.

Expand full comment

Could the name be more pretentious.

Expand full comment

I really don't understand all the vitriol always directed at this woman. Seriously. It is so weird

Expand full comment
founding

Not a fan (her ghosting of her father, for example, who did so much for her) but the hatred directed at this woman is unhinged.

Expand full comment

He did her wrong by going to the press when she begged him not to . Then ghosted her on her wedding day.

Expand full comment

Hey Bari If I wanted Royal Family gossip I'd read the Daily Mail. Keep the Sussex grifters off your page and keep bringing us serious content.

Expand full comment

I agree

Expand full comment

Never have understood how titles based on hereditary privilege and endowed with massive wealth can ever be squared with the DEI/SJW vibe that the Duchess attempts to project. If white colonialism/oppression is the wellspring of humanity's ills, then the Royal Family of Great Britain, which resides as keepers of the English traditions of empire, are the modern avatars of historical apex predators. The morally congruent alternative for Meghan and Harry would have been to marry for the love I presume they share and surrender their titles as a demonstration that hereditary elitism has no place in modern informed society. For a "person of color" to accept a royal title is equivalent to admitting that hereditary elitism is fine as long as non-whites can be in on the scam.

Expand full comment

Exactly! It's the hypocrisy! For all the commenters wondering why MM inspires such dislike, this is it.

Expand full comment

Well said.

Expand full comment
Mar 21·edited Mar 21

As I replied to the daily newletter, she is not, and never has been, a princess.

What she seems to be is someone who has chosen to follow the career trajectory of Wallis Simpson. I doubt it will end well. And whilst she stirs her pot of goop, I seem to hear the words "Hubble bubble, toil and trouble....."

Expand full comment

The duchess seems irrational. She claims to have suffered racism in the UK (especially in the palace). When she and Harry decided to leave the UK, they could have gone to any number of countries but they chose America - the most horribly awful, racist country on the planet where a woman of color faces a lifetime of abuse and oppression. Very irrational.

Expand full comment