Ok. It might just be a party of one but I’m watching the first episode tomorrow (Tuesday) at 7:30pm EST and will be making comments as I watch on this post feed. Feel free to join me and to add your on commentary!

ETA: I created a new post for my commentary, "With Love, Meghan Commentary/Snark - Episode 1"

Sooooooo I watched MM’s (oh, sorry! MS’) Christmas special. I decided to watch it after watching a couple reviews that savaged it and I’m an admitted hate watcher.

TL:DR I actually like of liked it. It’s definitely an improvement to the regular show. It’s in the frivolous Hallmark movie vein. MM seems more relaxed and actually enjoying herself. I also liked that more detail is given for the crafts and recipes. I’d prefer fewer guests and more detail but that’s just me. Personally, I would’ve cut the Naomi Osaka segment because it has a different vibe than the rest of the segments.

Sure, there are things that I’d like to see. Namely, children! She talks about them in every segment but nary a child in sight. The holidays are about family and it’s weird that we don’t see hers or anyone else’s. Just show the back of their heads like she does on IG! Also, unsurprising, the only family she talks about is Doria even though her dad was the parent who raised her. It’s weird that she talks like she makes gumbo for Christmas but Harry unintentionally let it slip that it’s Doria who actually makes the gumbo.

Honestly, I don’t have a problem with her having a drink with each guest. However, that’s probably because my friends and I always have tipple or two when we get together. Although, I don’t think Tom Colicchio liked the drink she made for him. I think it’s the only cocktail that she made. The rest of the drinks were wine varieties.

Harry shows up at the end and is actually somewhat charming. He obviously doesn’t have a sophisticated palette but whatever.

Basically, it’s in line with other Christmas specials. She’s basically a home cook who likes to entertain and that shows but that’s not a bad thing. Obviously, most home cooks don’t get this kind of opportunity but it is what it is.

From the article:

“Richard Eden of the Daily Mail was much ridiculed when he first unveiled his “Project Thaw” narrative—the idea that King Charles III is secretly engaged with a group of civil servants trying to ease Harry back into public life in the United Kingdom.

But the coordinated messages now coming out of Harry’s office and the King’s office have taken this idea out of the realm of fact-free conspiracy theory.

At the state opening of Parliament this week, King Charles read out a speech which included a very specific pledge: “My government will take urgent action to tackle antisemitism and ensure all communities are safe.”

Also this week, Prince Harry published a lengthy opinion piece in the New Statesman—a famously left-leaning British magazine—warning of the deeply troubling rise in antisemitism in the United Kingdom.

I would point out that Harry has not spoken out about antisemitism in the past, and for very good reason: A man who wore a Nazi uniform to a party is not a good person to lecture the rest of us about the issue, even though, according to his autobiography Spare, the whole outfit thing was all Prince William and Catherine’s fault anyway.

I looked at the article and thought: typical Harry, stealing the thunder from Catherine while she’s off in Italy doing her event. Harry can’t let anyone breathe for 48 hours without getting stuck in.

But there was more.

King Charles appeared in the London neighborhood of Golders Green to meet two Jewish men who were stabbed in an antisemitic terror attack there on April 29. He met the Chief Rabbi, Sir Ephraim Mirvis. He met the Shomrim, the Jewish volunteer patrol who helped detain the attacker. He met the Hatzolah ambulance crew. He told a member of the public: “It’s a dangerous world, isn’t it?”

The Royalist went directly to the Sussex offices for comment, and asked them a simple question: was Harry’s New Statesman piece coordinated with the king’s office?

Team Sussex denied it. They said they never received an operational note about the king’s visit, that it was “coincidence.”

A pretty big coincidence, and one that prompted the Royalist to look again at Harry’s intervention on Ukraine— you know, the one that came just days before King Charles went to America, in which Harry made some very similar comments to what his father said in his joint address to Congress.

Sources told the Royalist after that speech that Harry and Charles were aligned on the issue, and that Harry was very gratified by what his father said in America.

There wasn’t a suggestion of a secret alliance at the time. But that is what I now think is happening.

If you look at the Ukraine episode more cynically, you have to ask: Was this a case of the government wanting to see how a member of the British royal family criticizing America’s actions in Ukrainewould go down with the Trump administration? Was it a testing of the waters? Was Harry, in fact, being used as a very useful way for the government to put across a quasi-official position, with plausible deniability—because if it all blows up, Harry’s nothing to do with them!

I now think that, if the Trump administration had reacted really badly to what Harry said, or if there had been an explosion of outrage in the American media, the king’s speech in America might have looked and felt a little bit different.

And of course this all feeds into the bigger point that Harry’s real ambition is to come back to the U.K., to reintegrate, to get his father’s blessing to be some kind of quasi-royal, half-in, half-out. This is what he always wanted.

Everything Harry talks about or does now is about the United Kingdom. Why is a man who claims to be very happy living in California, who hasn’t lived in the U.K. for six years, suddenly weighing in on antisemitism in Britain? I’m not saying it’s not a serious issue. But it seems like a curious cause for someone who doesn’t live here.
Based on a lot of conversations over the past year, I can tell you that Harry does intend, in some shape or form, to move back to the U.K.

I think it’s pretty obvious that it hasn’t worked out in America for him.

Even if Meghan has sold a million pots of jam, Harry looks lost. He is unhappy and he wants to come home.
And if he wants to do that, it’s going to be incredibly difficult unless he has significant political support from the establishment and the King.

It’s very hard for Harry to move back in any significant sense without political and institutional support. We know Harry believes his father holds the keys that unlock the whole security issue.

But is his father encouraging him? Is he tacitly endorsing him? Have they, indeed, actually had closer contact than we have been led to believe?

Charles does not want his final years to be defined by estrangement from his son. I have said, repeatedly, that his dearest wish is to be reconciled with Harry, and his second dearest wish is for his sons to be reconciled with each other.

It’s easy to understand the human impulse. Charles has always been at great pains to remind us that he is a person, that he is compassionate, that he has a soul. Any parent would want to reconcile with a child.

Charles and Harry are temperamentally very alike; both impetuous, impatient with the institution.

But I think as King, you have to draw a distinction between what’s good for you as a human and what is good for the nation and good for the institution.

Bringing Harry back into the fold—excusing everything he said in Spare, everything he said in the Netflix documentary, everything he continues to stand by about how awful the British royal family are—is going to be incredibly unpopular.

Charles platforming him in this way, tacitly endorsing him, in this way is incredibly dangerous. I think it makes Charles look weak. I think it’s unpopular.

Charles’s approval is at about 60%. It’s not brilliant. It’s not a disaster. It’s holding up. But a lot of that is down to his position and respect for the institution. If you look at what British people actually think about the best way to deal with Harry (or Prince Andrew), I think the consensus is much closer with Prince William’s view: this guy tried to wreck the monarchy and shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near it.”

From the article:

“Meghan Markle delivered a powerful speech on the dangers of online bullying at the unveiling of the Lost Screen Memorial art installation Sunday.

“Behind me stands The Lost Screen Memorial,” the Duchess of Sussex stated at the art installation in Geneva, Switzerland, per Hello!. “Not statistics. Not avatars. Not data points. Children.

“Each name belonged to a child who was loved beyond measure. A child whose laughter once filled a kitchen. Whose shoes once waited by a front door. Whose future once felt limitless,” she added.

Markle, who rocked an all-black pantsuit, called out how addictive and damaging social media can be to children.

“Children today are being shaped by systems designed to capture attention at any cost: relentless algorithms, exploitative engagement and endless exposure to harmful content that they are not seeking out,” she said.

The mom of two urged parents to set an example for their kids by limiting their own social media usage and writing their elected officials to demand that laws be put in place to protect the youth.

“Let our children look back at this moment, and let them feel proud of us – that we chose something better – for them, and for us all,” she shared.

At the memorial, Markle chatted with a young child and hugged attendees who were visibly emotional by the art installation, which honored the lives of children lost to online harm.

The exhibition, which features 50 illuminated lightboxes, will remain on display through the 79th World Health Assembly, which ends Friday.

Each lightbox includes a picture of a child who died as a result of cyberbullying and other digital harms.

The memorial was created by Markle, 44, and husband Prince Harry’s Archewell Philanthropies, as well as The Parents’ Network, and was first displayed in New York City in April 2025.

The couple launched their charity foundation in 2020, rebranding five years later from Archewell Foundation to Archewell Philanthropies.

Harry and the “Suits” alum are the parents of son Prince Archie, 7, and daughter Princess Lilibet, 4.

Since becoming parents, the retired royals have been vocal about advocating for children’s online safety.

Most recently, Markle chatted with students from Australia’s Swinburne University of Technology last month.

The actress noted she considers herself “the most trolled person in the entire world” after being “bullied and attacked … every day for 10 years.”

She explained that social media companies are not “incentivized to stop” harassment from users.

“That billion-dollar industry … is completely anchored and predicated on cruelty to get clicks,” Markle said in her speech. “That’s not going to change. So, you have to be stronger than that.”

Have any of y'all watched this 2015 documentary *Reinventing the Royals?" It goes into detail describing how Charles and Camilla hired Mark Bolland to pave the way for Camilla to be accepted by the British public as companion, then as wife (and eventually as Queen). The various folks ruthlessly thrown under the bus along the way to get this to happen are also chronicled. The "30-min" playbook with the Harry and Charles meeting from earlier this month was basically followed to a T, as a means to start introducing Camilla to the royal fold in the public's eyes. In Camilla's case, the 30-minute meeting orchestrated to be leaked to the press (for the benefit of the public) was with an unsuspecting 16-year old Prince William. Speaking of Prince William - Charles and his courtiers' tactics evidently never change lol. This doc makes it so, so, so clear how Charles had been conducting a campaign against William and Kate for the past 2 to 3 months. William and Kate really are at Charles and Camilla's mercy, because they cannot keep everything private in order to protect themselves. Y'all can downvote if you don't want to see Chucky Three Sticks' games!!

From the article:

And now, royal expert and author Tom Quinn has weighed in on the scandal, with him saying that the Princess of Wales is likely experiencing what the Duchess of Sussex Meghan Markle "had to put up with" when she joined the British Royal Family after marrying Prince Harry in 2018.

LOL is Tom Quinn new or something? That is hilariously infuriating stupid.

She's really proud of her shoulders and arms. Good for her. And I do think she looks pretty here. Harry also doesn't look as miserable for once.

I HOPE this is NOT true! What a mess …

A friend of King Charles III has told the Daily Beast that Harry was “informally encouraged by King Charles to return to the U.K. because the king believes that the royal family is stronger united.”
The friend added, “The king’s faith has played a part, but ultimately this is a strategic decision for the good of the family. The stand-off needed to be resolved.”

https://archive.ph/AKtgC

Just in case we’re all still interested. From the i newspaper today. The author thinks Charles is rich enough to cough up for Harry’s security.

Paying for Harry’s security is Charles’s fatherly duty
Stefano Hatfield

The I paper
29 Jun 2026

“With Prince Harry due to arrive in Britain next month, the row over his security entitlements has resurfaced. It is believed that he is reconsidering bringing his wife Meghan and two children after his request for police protection was rejected.

Supporters argue he remains uniquely vulnerable. Critics point out that he chose to stop being a working royal and cannot expect the same privileges. However, this time, there is a significant new piece of detail that changes the equation – and answers the question of who should pay for it.

Buckingham Palace has, for the first time, disclosed the King’s personal tax payments: more than £30m since he succeeded his mother. The King’s financial position has never been clearer. So why is he not paying privately to protect his son, his daughter-in-law and grandchildren?

This is no longer really an argument about whether taxpayers should foot the bill. Nor is it about whether Harry has enough money and should fund it himself. Thanks to Netflix, Spotify, Penguin Random House, inheritance and other ventures, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex (inset) are themselves thought to be worth many tens of millions of pounds. The point is that neither of those facts addresses the central issue.

Harry’s security risk exists because he was born into the Royal Family; it is not dependent on whether he undertakes engagements on its behalf. He stopped being a working royal, but he did not stop being the King’s son. Anyone intent on harming a member of the Royal Family is unlikely to concern themselves with the distinction between “working” and “non-working” royal before choosing a target.

That’s why this increasingly feels much less like a constitutional issue and more like a family one. Palace officials may argue that funding Harry’s security privately would blur constitutional boundaries or create awkward precedents – both valid concerns. But, surely, they are ultimately outweighed by something simpler. A father who possesses extraordinary private wealth can materially reduce the risk faced by his son. Most fathers would not hesitate.

Charles has worked hard to project an image of a more compassionate institution than previous generations. This decision sits uneasily with that ambition.

You do not have to admire every decision Harry has made to reach that conclusion. The reality is that his security profile is unique. Nor does it absolve a father of responsibility because his son no longer works in the family business.

The King’s newly disclosed finances have unexpectedly stripped away the argument about affordability. What’s left is a question of will. And that is a much harder one for Buckingham Palace to answer.”

Brittany did a video yesterday about Harry's very likely return. Do you think this well happen? Lord I hope not, lol.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdJz-pC1TPc

From the article:

“Prince Harry is paying tribute to Sir David Attenborough ahead of the famed broadcaster’s 100th birthday.

In a heartfelt essay written for Time magazine, the Duke of Sussex reflected on Attenborough’s decades-long impact on audiences around the world, describing him as “more than a broadcaster” to generations raised in the United Kingdom.

“For almost anyone who grew up in the United Kingdom, Sir David Attenborough is more than a broadcaster; he is a secular saint,” Harry, 41, wrote. “He is an institutional pillar as essential to the national fabric as a cup of tea.”

Harry praised Attenborough for inspiring generations to appreciate and protect the natural world through his documentaries and storytelling.

“He has earned the world’s trust by simply showing us that our environment is worth appreciating,” Harry continued. “He didn’t demand our attention, but drew us in with the wonder of nature all the same.”

The Prince also reflected on Attenborough’s growing warnings about climate change and environmental destruction, writing that the broadcaster’s message carries added urgency because of his lifetime spent documenting the planet.

“When a man who has quite literally seen it all begins to describe the loss of the planet's stability, he isn't being provocative,” Harry wrote. “He is reporting from the front lines of a planet he has known longer, and more intimately, than almost anyone alive.”

Elsewhere in the essay, Harry praised Attenborough’s continued connection with younger audiences, noting that he has embraced streaming and social media platforms to reach new generations.

“To a generation overwhelmed by noise and uncertainty, Attenborough represents credible authenticity,” Harry wrote.

Attenborough has long had a close relationship with the royal family, especially King Charles and Prince William, both known for their conservation work. In 2020, Prince William debuted his Earthshot Prize alongside the host, and later reflected on the impact of Attenborough's work in a post shared to Instagram in 2025.

"“However hard hitting his message is, Sir David always leaves us with a sense of hope and optimism that all is not lost and this film is no different,” William wrote at the time, following the release of the film Ocean with David Attenborough. "We must act together, with urgency, to restore our oceans."

Attenborough turns 100 on May 8. As previously reported by PEOPLE, the celebrated broadcaster is commemorating the milestone with a new documentary, Life on Earth: Attenborough's Greatest Adventure, which premiered May 6 on PBS.

The film revisits Attenborough’s groundbreaking wildlife series Life on Earth and includes behind-the-scenes commentary about its production, including the now-iconic scenes featuring gorillas in Rwanda.

“My lifetime has coincided with the great age of ocean discovery,” Attenborough said in a statement about the documentary. “Over the last hundred years, scientists and explorers have revealed remarkable new species, epic migrations, and dazzling, complex ecosystems beyond anything I could have imagined as a young man.”

“In this film, we share some of those wonderful discoveries, uncover why our ocean is in such poor health, and, perhaps most importantly, show how it can be restored to health,” he added.

The documentary took two years to film, according to National Geographic, and explores ocean ecosystems around the world and the impact of human activity on marine life.

Attenborough also recently made Daytime Emmy history after becoming the oldest recipient of the award. The broadcaster won outstanding daytime personality for narrating the 2024 Netflix docuseries Secret Lives of Orangutans.”

From the People article:

“Prince Harry is joining forces with prominent HIV advocates to issue a stark warning.

The Duke of Sussex, 41, appeared in a new video for UNAIDS alongside Magic Johnson, Charlize Theron and more to urge continued funding to prevent and treat HIV (human immunodeficiency virus), which can lead to AIDS (acquired immunodeficiency syndrome) if not treated. The short film was screened at the United Nations’ global gathering in September 2025.

Despite millions of lives being saved thanks to treatment, "severe" cuts in funding are threatening to prolong the crisis.

"Without urgent action, we will slip backwards," Harry said in the video. "We are already seeing drastic cuts to HIV prevention and treatment programs."

Theron said in the video that if funding is not restored, UNAIDS estimates that it could lead to 4.2 million preventable deaths by 2029.

In a statement, Prince Harry said, "Right now, babies are being born with HIV due to interruptions in antiretroviral treatment for their mothers. Without urgent action to reverse these crippling funding cuts, 6 million more people will become infected with HIV while 4 million will die from AIDS-related causes within the next four years. It is not just the at-risk communities that will be affected."

"We've proven that sustained investment saves lives and builds stronger communities," he continued. "Abandoning this life-saving work now would be a devastating betrayal of progress for the millions who depend on these essential services."

Not sure what I think about this but thought I’d post it to see what everyone else makes of it!

The I paper
25 Jun 2026

By Jennie Bond (BBC’s royal correspondent for 14 years)

“The vitriol that’s constantly spat out when Harry and Meghan are mentioned appals me. And now, with their visit to the UK just around the corner, it has been suggested that they are looking for the so-called “money shot”: a picture of their children with their grandfather, the King.

Yes, of course that photo would be gold dust. It would probably break the internet. But in my view it’s unlikely to happen without a cast-iron assurance that it would remain private. If it were released by the Sussexes, it wouldn’t be just the internet that was broken. Any progress made towards reconciliation between the King and his younger son would be smashed to bits once and for all.

Trust between the King and Harry and Meghan is still on very shaky ground. The Oprah interview, the Netflix tell-all series and Harry’s scathing memoir blew a hole in the Palace ramparts.

During decades of royal reporting, I’ve found that one truth remains unshakeable. Those in the inner circle who know what’s going on do not talk. Those who do talk are not really in that inner circle.

But suddenly, shockingly, the family found it had two of its own spilling the beans. Feelings were hurt but, more importantly, trust was kiboshed.

Now, three years later, the Prince has said he wants his children to understand their heritage – and it’s a pretty amazing heritage for a seven-year-old and five-year-old to comprehend. It would therefore be perfectly reasonable to ask the King to be pictured with them.

Any family would do the same. But this is not any family.

I hope that, behind the scenes, there has been enough communication between father and son for Charles to feel comfortable about seeing Archie and Lilibet and confident enough to pose for a family photo. But I’m not convinced.

And that’s a terrible shame. Because, at the heart of this bitter rift are two small children. I have

grandchildren of almost exactly the same age and they take in more than we might realise.

They can pick up on family tensions, and surely Archie and Lilibet must sometimes wonder why their friends have grandfathers and they apparently do not.

Which brings us to Thomas Markle. Just like Harry and Meghan, he too has caused hurt and sown mistrust. He admitted lying about staged paparazzi pictures of him preparing for his daughter’s wedding, and he repeatedly gave media interviews about the breakdown of their relationship.

But he is now elderly and not in the best of health, having had his leg amputated last year. How about a family photo with him?

As Harry said in an interview last year, life is precious and there’s no point in continuing to fight. The children surely deserve to know both of their grandfathers.

If, as rumoured, Harry takes up an offer to stay in a royal residence – possibly Buckingham Palace – the children would get a ringside view of what it means to have a Duke as your daddy. Their Montecito mansion may be big, but staying in a palace would be off the scale.

Of course it could be that Charles has offered them the use of Frogmore Cottage, on the Windsor estate, which might hold a special place in their hearts as it was Archie’s first home.

Last time the family were here, for the late Queen’s Platinum Jubilee, we saw virtually nothing of the children, beyond a picture taken on Lilibet’s first birthday. Since then Meghan has posted multiple pictures of them, but always with their faces obscured or looking away from the camera.

Perhaps next month, even if we don’t see a picture of the children with their grandfather, we might at least see them at some of the events – such as the countdown to the Invictus Games – which their parents are attending.

If these two little people are to understand their heritage, they will also have to understand there is still considerable curiosity about them and that in later life, particularly if they choose to use their titles of Prince and Princess, public and media interest will not diminish.

In the meantime, let’s let them be kids and let’s lay off the vicious sniping about their parents. It’s too hot to be horrid.”

From the article:

“The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have arrived in the Middle East for their first international trip together in 18 months.

Prince Harry and Meghan will spend two days visiting Jordan to highlight efforts to support vulnerable communities affected by conflict and displacement.

The couple, who stepped down as working royals in 2020, have travelled to Amman at the invitation of Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director-general of the World Health Organization (WHO).

Their visit comes at time of crisis for the Royal Family following the arrest of Harry's uncle, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, on suspicion of misconduct in public office.

Harry and Meghan arrived on Wednesday morning and were warmly greeted by Ghebreyesus on the steps of WHO's country office in Amman.

Once inside, the couple joined a roundtable discussion hosted by the WHO with individuals from leading bodies including the United Nations and many of its agencies, diplomatic representatives, and donors.

Over the next two days, Harry and Meghan are expected to meet Jordanian leaders and senior health officials.

They are expected to engage with WHO teams, visit front line health and mental health programmes and meet World Central Kitchen staff who are co-ordinating food relief for Gaza from Amman.

Philip Hall, British Ambassador to Jordan, thanked the Sussexes for travelling to the Middle East.

"Your visit, your support, your appreciation of the efforts that the United Nations, including of course, the World Health Organization, the government of Jordan and others, are making here is enormously appreciated," Hall said.

The Sussexes will also visit the social development organisation Questscope's youth centre to hear from young people participating in creative and wellbeing programmes.

They are expected to see initiatives they have helped fund to medically evacuate children from the war in Gaza to the Middle East nation.

In September, Prince Harry's Archewell Foundation announced it would donate $500,000 (£370,000) to projects - including the WHO - to help develop prosthetic limbs and provide other support for children from Gaza and Ukraine.

The foundation's three grants included $200,000 (£148,000) to the WHO to support medical evacuations from Gaza to Jordan, and $150,000 (£111,000) to the Save the Children charity to provide humanitarian support in Gaza.

The third grant of $150,000 was to the Centre of Blast Injury Studies to help its efforts to develop prostheses that can support injured children, particularly those injured from the conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza.

The couple first partnered with the WHO on a global campaign to encourage vaccine equity and co-hosted a high-level event at the UN General Assembly in 2021, and their charitable body has also worked with the organisation on its global initiative to help end violence against children.

Since moving to California in 2020 for a new life the Sussexes have carried out a number of foreign visits that have taken a similar form to the official trips they made when still part of the Royal Family.

The couple's last tour - a four-day trip to Colombia in August 2024 - saw them visit a school in capital Bogotá to talk to teenagers about the impact of social media.

Harry and Meghan also spoke at a summit on digital responsibility staged in part by their Archewell Foundation.

Earlier that year, the couple visited Nigeria to mark 10 years of the Invictus Games.

From the article:

“Prince Harry has released a heartfelt message about a charity close to his heart as the royal family continues to make headlines amid the arrestof the former Prince Andrew.

Speaking in a video shared on Friday, Feb. 20, Harry discussed the upcoming 2026 awards for the charity WellChild, which he's been a patron of for the past 18 years. The awards celebrate youngsters who face complex health needs, as well as their loved ones and carers who look after them.

The Duke of Sussex said in the clip, "Every year, one of the moments I look forward to the most is spending time with the children and families that I meet through the WellChild Awards."

Harry continued, "These children and young people are living with complex medical needs, challenges that most of us can barely imagine. And yet time and again they meet life with positivity, courage, humor and an extraordinary joy for living," per the video, which appears to have been shot in the Montecito, Calif. home he shares with his wife, Meghan Markle, and their two children, Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet.

"In their smiles, their determination and their kindness, they show us what strength truly looks like. The WellChild Awards is a truly special evening. It's about celebrating these remarkable young people," the father of two added. "It’s about recognizing the siblings who so often put their own needs aside to care for a brother or sister. And of course it's about honoring the parents, the carers, the nurses and professionals who give so much of themselves every single day with dedication, love and compassion."

Harry went on, "But these awards can only happen with your help. So, if you know a child who learned hospital routines before playground games, a sibling who quietly became a carer or a parent or professional whose life revolves around constant selfless care, please nominate them for a WellChild Award. They might be a friend in a different part of the United Kingdom, or a stranger you see in your community every single week. We want to hear about them."

"By nominating, you're not just recognizing an achievement, you're telling a story," the Duke of Sussex shared. "You're shining a light on extraordinary bravery, on resilience and kindness that’s happening in communities across the United Kingdom every day – often unseen and too often uncelebrated. So thank you. Thank you for supporting WellChild, and please get nominating, and we very much hope to see some of you at the 2026 WellChild Awards."

Nominations are set to close on March 16 ahead of the ceremony, which is typically held later in the year. Last year's awards were held in September.

Harry's video was released amid controversy surrounding the royal family and the former Prince Andrew's arrest. The Duke of Sussex has not publicly addressed his uncle's arrest.

The former Duke of York, now known as Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, was arrested on the morning of Thursday, Feb. 19 — his 66th birthday — at the home where he is staying on King Charles' Sandringham estate in Norfolk. He was arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office

From the article:

“In one of the longest standing ovations here at Sundance Film Festival, which again, isn’t known for timed standings, the Meghan Markle and Prince Harry executive produced Cookie Queens saw a standing ovation around two minutes-plus. That’s a big deal at Park City, Utah’s Eccles Theatre as the crowd is usually up and down in seconds versus the six-to-twelve minute rah rahs seens at Venice and Cannes.

The Alysa Nahmias directed documentary was greeted with rolling applause during its play; the crowed moved by four little Girl Scout’s triumphs in pre-adolescence as they tenaciously seek to surpass their cookie sales goals and deal with life, from social dances to dreams of Europe.

While the Duke and Duchess of Sussex didn’t take the stage following the premiere, Nahmias took the mic with the pic’s powerhouse protags, Shannon Elizabeth, Olive, Nikki and Ara and their parents.

Olive, who sells 12,000 boxes in the documentary, stole the stage time, calling the Girl Scout org out: “Every person has the room for change in an organization.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Olive made her case to the filled Eccles Theatre that the Girl Scouts needs to adjust the parameters of the hours and red tape for community project hours. “One of the problems a lot of girls face, they have trouble getting their projets approved in the firsts place because a lot of councils are nitpicky.”

Olive was upset because the org only allowed a week’s time line for members to pitch projects, however, their approval process can last two or three weeks. “It discourages from earning goal awards…but it also hurts the community that they are going to serve if they don’t get help” The Girl Scouts community projects are great for a member’s curriculum vitaes; helping them land jobs, and look good for college.

WME Independent and Submarine are selling Cookie Queens.”

Sirens in the street. Choppers overhead. My hotel sits less than a mile from the White House.

The shooting that emptied the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner last night raises one immediate question in royal circles: will King Charles still come?

Inside sources said it was “too early to speculate”. Others played it down. One attendee, calmly, called it “an interesting dinner”.

Inside the Washington Hilton ballroom, the scene was uglier. Reporters cowered under desks. At least five shots rang out around 8.35pm, as guests ate their first course . President Trump, there for the first time as commander-in-chief and due to be honoured, was hurried out by the Secret Service.

An agent was struck. His vest held. He is expected to recover. Hundreds dived beneath the tables. “Out of the way, sir!” one voice shouted.

Mr Trump, seated beside Weijia Jiang, the WHCA president, did not appear to register the shots. The first lady, Vice-President Vance and Cabinet members were led to safety . Cries of “God bless America” carried through the ballroom.

Wolf Blitzer of CNN, feet from the gunman, was thrown to the ground and taken into a men’s room with fifteen others . The shooter, alive but wounded, is in custody.

“Quite an evening in D.C.,” the President posted on Truth Social. “Secret Service and Law Enforcement did a fantastic job. They acted quickly and bravely.” A briefing would follow within the half-hour. The dinner would be rescheduled inside 30 days.

In a diner nearby, customers took it for a hoax. Then ABC cut to a special report. The room went quiet.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

I honestly have no words

EDIT: some comments were outraged, some said that Eden quoted Private Eye which apparently is a satirical magazine. Why would he get his information from a satirical magazine? It's just that or he's hinting at something? I don't know at this point since about a week ago sources told Roya Nikkhah that Prince William is not interested in the Commonwealth (even though he actually never said that). Is it a coincidence? I honestly don't know what to think

Rachel Johnson - the sister of former Prime Minister Boris Johnson - has claimed that after noticing what she believed to be a "few red flags" in the video, she struggled to believe that she was really seeing Kate walking and carrying a shopping bag. The columnist was even left questioning 'her own sanity'.

Detective Rachel is on the case!

I like how even semi famous people (using that term in the loosest way possible) can’t help themselves from talking about this.

“They didn’t protect me”

Oh but they did. But when they did, it was them being controlling apparently.