As mucky madam Ghislaine Maxwell gets a new appeal lawyer in spite of owing a fortune to her previous representatives, journalist Daphne Barak PR peddles for her after posing for pictures with the feckless fool that is the ultimate grifter, Sarah, Duchess of York
It must be noted that scum tends to inevitably float to the top of any pond and that birds of a feather tend to stick together. Examples of such came last week with revelations that Ghislaine Maxwell is now being represented by the pugnacious paedophile Harvey Weinstein’s lawyer and that a PR peddler named Daphne Barak is about to share a new interview with the noxious nonce in the coming days.
Whilst Barak – whom also posed for snaps with she who has never confirmed if she repaid loans taken from the croaked paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, Sarah, Duchess of York last month – was this morning given acreage to promote her ‘interview’ with her old chum of many years in both The Sun on Sunday and The Mail on Sunday, it was Page Six that revealed that Maxwell was becoming “jailbirds of a feather” with her old chum Weinstein after taking on attorney Arthur L. Aidala.
Maxwell (AKA prisoner 02879-509), who is now laughably also supposedly currently teaching “etiquette lessons” in the clink if the Independent is to be believed, still owes a sum estimated at £3 million ($3.7 million, €3.4 million or درهم13.5 million) to lawyers previously hired by her, her brother Kevin and her estranged husband Scott Borgerson.
Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party.
Pictured Top – Ghislaine Maxwell with Jeffrey Epstein sat outside a cabin at Balmoral during a visit their when they supposedly met the late Queen even – if Daphne Barak is to be believed. Of this, Barak shares that Maxwell has now declared: “The Queen was one of the most exceptional women I ever had the honour and privilege of meeting.” The convicted sex trafficker added that the monarch had a “sparkle” in her eyes and declared she was “profoundly sorry” to learn of her death last year.
Birds of a rotten feather… The gruesome trio of paedophiles that was Harvey Weinstein, Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell pictured at a party given by he who paid a sum alleged to be as high as £12 million to a woman he claimed he never met, Prince Andrew, at Windsor Castle in 2006.Arthur L. Aidala is very much of the publicity hungry school of lawyers. Aside from Harvey Weinstein, his firm, Aidala, Bertuna & Kamins, has also represented other mates of Ghislaine Maxwell including Alan Dershowitz. In documents submitted this week, he claimed: “[Maxwell] was malnourished… And yet she’s supposed to sit for a trial [with her] life on the life… In the United States of America, anyone who’s accused of any crime should not be abused by the US government the way she was abused… She did not get a fair trial… The judge ignored the many claims of malnourishment, living with vermin in her cell, lack of sleep, and overall deplorable conditions. There were also issues regarding lack of access to her lawyers. This is all in violation of her fundamental constitutional rights and will be powerfully brought to the attention of the appellate courts.” Of how he came to be involved with the mucky madam and her family, scions of a pension pot plundering tyrant, Aidala added: “After her sentencing… her trial team was done representing her and her family quite frankly reached out to us. Obviously we’d been in the headlines with Mr Weinstein’s case.”Scotch drinking “Arthur cancels ‘cancel culture’” Aidala – pictured with Harvey Weinstein – was described in a July 2022 article in ‘The New York Times’ as “camera-ready” and “a lawyer who welcomes press attention.” Amongst this registered Democrat’s previous clients are the accused “socialite granny shover” Lauren Pazienza, the crossdressing oddity Rudolph W. Giuliani, cleared “killer crane rigger” William Rapetti, “daddy’s penis chopper-offer” Brigitte Harris and “boyfriend stabber” John Pickett. Of him, Alan Dershowitz tellingly remarked: “Arthur is the new me.”Daphne Barak pictured in December with Sarah, Duchess of York and with Hillary Clinton – whom she references her as having “hosted” and “supported the presidential bid” of. Here is a ‘journalist’ whose close connections clearly muddy her mind when it comes to interviewing her subjects. Why didn’t this ‘journalist’ ask mucky madam Maxwell about ‘Killary’s’ husband taking at least 27 flights on Jeffrey Epstein’s ‘Lolita Express’ and his convicted sex trafficker co-collaborator attending Chelsea Clinton’s wedding? Curious that; very curious indeed.
Air New Zealand call out Prince Harry’s lies about bookings to fly Thomas Markle and again illustrate that him and ‘Mendacious Meg’ find the truth highly inconvenient
Whilst also Sir Freddie admitted this his “devotion to his work possibly short-changed all his wives,” another frequent flyer with a problematic wife – though generally himself prone to using land of olive oil production loving Sir Elton John’s private jets rather than anything as common as Easyjet – named the Duke of Sussex has been called out after telling ‘porky pies’ about booking flights with Air New Zealand in his tittle-tattling tome Spare.
Responding to claims in the book that the former Meghan Markle’s now husband had booked first-class flights to bring her father, Thomas, to Britain from Mexico, the airline yesterday tweeted: “Introducing #SussexClass. Apparently, coming soon.”
Air New Zealand later added that it has never operated flights between Mexico and the United Kingdom and equally confirmed, that they do not offer a first-class service. Speaking to the New Zealand Herald, a spokesperson for the firm very clearly added: “We’ve never had flights between Mexico and the UK. And we only have Business Premier.”
Responding on social media, members of the Twitterati then understandably piled on – with one writing: “Any spare seats, anyone?”
Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party.
The tweet in question has well and truly made yet another mockery of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.Sir Freddie Laker’s remarkable life story was immortalised in a book by Roger Eglin and Berry Ritchie in 1980.Here was a frequent flyer who was a lot more fun than the noxious nuisances that are the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.Described as a “Russian oligarch kind of jet,” the Bombardier Global 6000 aircraft that the couple returned to California on from Farnborough in June 2022 emitted nearly 60 tonnes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Of this, the ‘Daily Mail’ stated: “Under the terms of the Paris Agreement objective of keeping global warming below 2C, each person’s carbon budget should be no more than 2.1 tonnes per year – meaning Harry and Meghan exceeded this by nearly 15 times in just one flight. As the Sussexes also flew into Britain on a private jet, and assuming it was the same aircraft, their overall return trip would have exceeded the annual limit by nearly 30 times. By comparison, the carbon emission rating of flying from Heathrow to LA in an economy-class seat on a commercial aircraft is 1.4 tonnes, according to climate consultancy Cube6.” They added: “The Queen’s grandson previously described climate change as one of the ‘most pressing issues we are facing’, and told Oprah Winfrey during the couple’s bombshell interview last year: ‘We need to do better about stopping or allowing the things that are causing so much harm to so many of us at the source, rather than being distracted by the symptom.’”In September 2019, it was reported that since marrying the alleged former “yacht girl” Meghan Markle, the now King Charles III’s second son is said to have used private plans for six out of ten flights despite claiming to travel commercial 99% of the time. Here is a condescending couple who tell others what to do and then who themselves go and do the exact opposite without shame or explanation.
The pathetic attention seeking son of the late Diana, Princess of Wales has previously claimed that his decision to use private aircraft is because he is determined to “keep his family safe.” Clearly immune to the fact that the vast majority of the public who fly commercial are perfectly safe, here is a brat who clearly has no conception of how hypocritical he and his sordid sidekick truly are.
Matthew Steeples suggests Prince Harry’s revolting revelations about his “todger” to be inappropriate given he moved to the US to become a more “private” person
It has become clearer and clearer in recent days that Prince Harry doesn’t understand the concept of “public” and “private.” Whilst this renegade royal moved to America in 2016 as he and his wicked wastrel wife supposedly didn’t want to be “public” anymore, their inability to remain “private” in the time since is proof that here are a mendacious pair of meddlers with no concept that with “rights” come “responsibilities.”
Turning to another “private member” mentioned in his memoirs Spare – of which every single member of the public I’ve spoken with since their release has responded with words to the effect of: “Please SPARE us anymore from that drip” – this morning, the Daily Mail’s Richard Eden shared a retweet that included a clip of the Duke of Sussex reading aloud from his tittle-tattling tome.
In his tweet – captioned “Have a listen to this clip, if you dare… #PrinceHarry #Spare #royal” – Eden tellingly selected a tweet by a former Penguin Random House book editor named Dominic Wakeford.
In that tweet, Wakeford – whose former employers, of course, are the publishers of Spare – wrote: “This book is a Freudian nightmare.” The tweet has, to date, been shared some 5,000 times and liked by over 56,000 accounts and in it, a 0:33-second clip read by King Charles III’s second son is included.
Prince Harry shockingly shares:
“My penis was oscillating between extremely sensitive and borderline traumatised. The last place I wanted to be was Frostnipistan.”
“I’d been trying some home remedies including one recommended by a friend. She’d urged me to apply Elizabeth Arden cream. ‘My mum used that on her lips. You want me to put that on my todger?’ ‘It works Harry, trust me.’”
“I found the tube and the minute I opened it, the smell transported me through time. It felt as if though my mother was right there in the room and I took a smidge and applied it down there.”
Responding, one member of the Twitterati observed: “He’s thinking of his mother as he applies the cream to his nether regions. My God, he really is a tuppence short of a shilling and what bright spark thought this was worthy of inclusion? I’m certain Harry expected the sympathy vote, but he comes across as stark raving mad!”
Another added of the former Meghan Markle’s puppet’s product placement attempt: “For years, Elizabeth Arden has been my trusty companion. I can never feel the same about it EVER again. I mean, I knew it was a cure, but…”
Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party.
Pictured Top – The world has reacted to the Duke of Sussex’s first ‘book’ by mocking him mercilessly. Aside from mocking him up as a “colossal tit,” this randy royal’s raging romps have been shot down by booksellers also. In Swindon, a “cheeky” retailer named Bert’s Books displayed ‘Spare’ next to a copy of Bella Mackie’s ‘How To Kill Your Family” in what Sky News termed a “light-hearted nod to his allegations against the royal family.”
Prior to getting it on with the mendacious menace then known as Meghan Markle – a wicked wastrel woman whom may have been married twice or maybe even three times – the second son of the late Diana, Princess of Wales was quite happy to fool around in all sorts of ways – some more curious than others. Whether Elizabeth Arden creams were involved remains unknown.Elsewhere this morning on social media emails sent ‘Ginge and Cringe’ have been doing the rounds. In one of them came yet again further proof that these rotten ratbag royals DID cooperate with Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand for their – like ‘Spare’ now also – bargain basement bag-of-bilge book about their avaricious antics. It is time now for Omid Scobie to be called out for what he truly is; here is not an independent minded author but here instead is a pointless puppet controlled PR peddler answerable to only woman – the mendacious menace formerly known as Meghan Markle.Another popular royal commentary account on Twitter going by the name ‘FawnOverMeGain’ went further and shared allegations about the Duke of Sussex on Tuesday. Whilst we very clearly point out that these allegations are completely unsubstantiated as of the present moment, that the tempestuous royal is accused of “making Prince Andrew look like a saint” is most definitely notable.
The Twitterati reacts to the Duke of Sussex sharing a sickening story about his “private member” (and a pugnacious plug for Elizabeth Arden’s cosmetic products)…
As Prince Harry literally shows himself as a complete prick by going on about his privates, Royal Marines commando turned acclaimed animal rescuer Pen Farthing slams him over animal suffering in Kabul
As the public ponders pugnacious Prince Harry’s ‘privates’ given his pointless prattling about his not-so-significant anything but private ‘member,’ former British Marines commando turned Nowzad Dogs charity founder Pen Farthing took to Twitter to share that the Duchess of Sussex’s drippy appendage’s antics have forced him out of Kabul.
In a series of tweets and comments, Farthing, a war hero and author of the best-selling One Dog at a Time, observed:
“We now have to deal with Taliban officials directly in every aspect of daily life here. We were trying to put what happened here behind us. We don’t need former soldiers bragging about numbers they killed, especially as it was all for nothing.”
“People were killed for no reason. I was a royalist until today. Prince Harry should have thought through the security implications for those of us still in Afghanistan trying to bring about some good.”
“It would be pretty difficult to get yourself out of any trouble you found yourself in here today, because there is no support. I just hope the Taliban don’t decide to make any examples of the ex-military they can get to.”
In other missives, both before and after his departure, he added:
“He never protected me at any point in my career thank you. And I have not targeted him. I have merely said he has been badly advised and puts former mil like me in quite a position as I am sat in Kabul… and THANK YOU for your support.”
“Because the Taliban are now the ones in power & their measured response was the Taliban he killed had families & every media outlet in the world is promoting it… Which now makes ex-forces a potential target for a revenge attack especially those on their own with no protection.”
“Well I was a Royalist until today…. Cheers #PrinceHarry You have been very badly advised I would probably say. And glad you thought through the security implications of those of us still out in #Afghanistan trying to bring about some good. #idiot #notmyprince.”
“To the idiots who made dumbass comments in support of #PrinceHarry in my tweet below, know I have had to evac from #Kabul tonight in case of potential reprisal attacks on ex-forces people like me in the wake of his badly judged memoir… The animals suffer not me. You happy?”
Whilst a few responded by coming out in support of Prince Harry’s ridiculous ramblings, the majority joined Farthing in condemning the disgrace that is now very much King Charles’s estranged second son.
Amongst responses about this “traitor” were comments that included: “He’s a disgrace to the nation,” “he’s a bell end,” and a suggestion that “[he’s] put a target on the whole country’s back and the royal family” also. “He needs serious help,” one very sensible person finally concluded.
Elsewhere, the Daily Mail’s Richard Eden shared another very relevant piece of news about the already bargain-basement bucket book. He tweeted: “If you think Prince Harry’s claims in his memoirs are shocking, imagine what he left out! His and Meghan’s cheerleader Omid Scobie says lawyers at the publisher Penguin Random House sent back FORTY-ONE pages of questions after Harry’s ghostwriter submitted a final draft.”
Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party.
Pictured Top – A war hero who now devotes his life to saving animals in conflict zones (left) and a pointless prick who spends his days profiteering and taking the dime of Netflix, Penguin Random House and Spotify (right).
Prince Harry has banged on about how he went to America to seek a more private life. In the time since he arrived there, all he has actually done instead is seek out copious amounts of publicity and sought, along with his money motivated, mendacious menace of a wife, to profiteer and drag the names of the royal and Markle families into the quagmire. Shame on him.Surely by now, even the wicked wench formerly known as Meghan Markle must realise that her stupid strategy to have become a royal without understanding that with rights comes responsibilities has well and truly backfired. This ‘Modern Day Mrs Simpson’ should be sent to Siberia as the disgraceful, disreputable pariah that she undoubtedly is and she should take her dodgy drip of a sidekick with her.
A year on from her conviction, the rabbit hole that is the story of Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein and their victims widens with new lawsuits on the horizon and new troubles for Prince Andrew also
As someone named Niki Watkins once crooned: “If you think it’s all over, then the joke is on you” and a year on from her conviction, the saga of Ghislaine Maxwell and her wicked associates continues to deliver up new twists and turns that prove that this is a saga that is far from over.
In a 30-minute podcast, released on New Year’s Eve by Law & Crime, attorneys Sigrid McCawley and Kenya Davis reflected on “recent developments” and claimed that “a new Empire State law could change the course of the investigation in 2023.”
Of this, Law & Crime’s Adam Klasfeld reported:
“Known as the Adult Survivors Act, the statute temporarily suspends the statute of limitations on historic sexual abuse claims. The statute is similar to and broadens the reach of another New York law called the Child Victims Act, which focused on the sexual abuse of minors specifically.”
Addressing the matter that sends the Twitterati into a tizzy on a daily basis as to no other accused co-conspirator of Maxwell having been charged, McCawley – who has represented a number of Epstein’s victims including Annie Farmer – declared: “I think the lesson and legacy of the Ghislaine Maxwell case is that nobody is above the law in the United States.”
Going further, Davis added: “I think you will see a ramp-up pretty, pretty quickly, especially after the start of the year” with “more docket activity soon.”
Whilst Donald Trump “wished her well, whatever that may mean” in times past of his old mucker Maxwell, he may well now be hoping she does something completely different. The 45th POTUS and Bill Clinton and Prince Andrew and others will most definitely prefer ‘The Bouncing Czech’s’ deviant daughter continues down the path of solemn silence.
Elsewhere on 30th December, the New York Post reported that Virginia Roberts Giuffre has now claimed that a defamation suit filed against her by Rina Oh, a lover of the dead paedophile Epstein during the early 2000s, is “a sham.” Ms Oh, whom admitted she had “brought at least three women to Epstein” in 2020, had filed a £8.4 million ($10 million, €9.5 million or درهم36.7 million) suit last January after Giuffre publicly named her as “one of Epstein’s recruiters” on Twitter.
At the time, this now 39-year-old lady who also received a sum estimated as high as £10.1 million ($12 million, €11.3 million or درهم44.1 million) from Prince Andrew in spite of him claiming he’d never met her, claimed Oh’s interview had “retraumatised” her. Oh had revealed she had taken the “then-teenage Giuffre to buy a school girl outfit to please the rich financier – justifying the outing by saying ‘17 to me is not a child’” and also stands accused of “cutting and slashing her as part of the sadomasochist abuse for Epstein’s pleasure.”
Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party.
Rina Oh now lauds herself as “producing art therapy with children” and an “longtime advocate of healthy eating for children” but also has been accused of doing far worse things to youngsters by Virginia Roberts Giuffre. Ms Oh is quite proud of her work with children, chefs and restaurateurs like Jacques Pépin (pictured far right) and Dave Arnold and even has a blog named ‘Dining With Out-Laws.’ She is far quieter about her time as the supposed girlfriend of Jeffrey Epstein.Rina Oh – according to the podcast ‘The Recruiters: Broken: Seeking Justice’ – has suggested the 10th March 2001 photograph of Ghislaine Maxwell, Prince Andrew and Virginia Roberts at 44 Kinnerton Street, Belgravia, London to be a “composite” and not genuine. Ms Oh has produced paintings herself of Jeffrey Epstein as Bacchus, Ghislaine Maxwell “nude in The Garden of Sin (like Eve)” and also sketched images of the pension pot plunderer Robert Maxwell also; her husband, Vincent Amen, was a “a former Michael Jackson employee who was named as one of five alleged unindicted co-conspirators in the late star’s unsuccessful 2005 molestation trial. Mr Amen denied the allegations.” Michael Thomas, a New Zealand photographer, who photographed the original 10th March 2001 image in 2011 responded: “As I have said before, it was just an ordinary photo you would have got from a chemist in the days of negatives. Surely, if it was fake, every media outlet in the world would be getting sued for using it. The fact that isn’t happening, to me says everything… It wasn’t like [Roberts Giuffre] pulled the photo of Prince Andrew out, it was just in among the rest of them. They were just typical teenage snaps. There’s no way that photo is fake.”For Prince Andrew (pictured here with mutual Epstein and Maxwell chum Peter Mandelson), aside from being turfed out of Buckingham Palace by his elder brother as the year begins, life could take a turn for the worse on another front. The gagging order agreed to when the late Queen’s second son agreed to pay a sum estimated between £3 million and £10 million to Virginia Roberts Giuffre comes to an end in February. After that time, Ms Giuffre will be free to write about the matter and give interviews; her commentary could prove yet another bombshell given what she’s previously said of ‘Randy Andy’ and others.Lord Mandelson ‘living-it-up’ with Jeffrey Epstein in the presence of the latter’s butler, Valdson Viera Cotrin, at the £10 million Parisian paedo pad owned by the Ponzi scheming sex fiend circa 20th January 2007. That the Labour peer – whose name 10 numbers attributed features in the Epstein-Maxwell ‘black book’ – was willing to celebrate the financier’s birthday with him is shocking – especially given it was widely by then known that Epstein had been charged with sex crimes in August 2006. The key ‘classic question’ Lord Mandelson now needs to answer is a paraphrasing of that put to decidedly dippy Debbie McGee by the late Caroline Ahern (in her role as the bonkers but brilliant ‘Mrs Merton’) in 1997: “What, first, Peter, was it that attracted you to the multi-millionaire Jeffrey Epstein?”Meanwhile now, though Maxwell will go down in history alongside her wicked sex offenders including Harvey Weinstein and Jeffrey Epstein, outrage remains that not a single one of those she sex trafficked her victims to has been brought to justice.Shockingly, in spite of being due to appear in court in the UK this month on sexual assault charges, Kevin Spacey (pictured partying in Buckingham Palace with Ghislaine Maxwell), is to play President Franjo Tudjman in a 90-minute film titled ‘Once Upon A Time in Croatia.’ Director Jakov Sedlar justified giving Spacey the role and claimed “[he] is absolutely innocent” in comments to ‘The Times’ yesterday.Facing troubles on other fronts… Notorious for fakery as well as for being a convicted sex offender and noxious nonce, Ghislaine Maxwell (AKA ‘Mrs Scott Borgerson’ as well ‘Jen Marshall’ and ‘Janet Marshall’; now known just as prisoner 02879-509) faces troubles on the home front. Whilst it is known that Mr Borgerson ended his relationship with Maxwell prior to her December 2021 trial by telephone, it is not known if they have yet divorced. Miss Maxwell transferred some £15 million to her husband since circa 2015 or 2016 and currently the sum owed to lawyers is an estimated £3 million plus. The prospects for the mucky madam now being able to afford to appeal her sentence thus looks more and more unlikely.
As Piers Morgan gets hacked on Twitter, we remind readers of his ongoing spat with the especially ‘Hacked Off’ actor Hugh Grant
The scourge of the red tops that is the actor Hugh Grant tweets from the handle @HackedOffHugh and ironically last night, one of his favourite targets, Piers Morgan – who formerly worked at papers that most definitely engaged in phone hacking – literally found himself hacked also.
Targeted supposedly by what the DailyMail.com’s James Gordon subsequently termed “a foul-mouthed troll” on Twitter, Morgan’s 8.3 million followers witnessed “[his] account sending out expletive-laden messages.”
The hackers, supposedly a group named the “Chuckling Squad” initially demanded the recognition of “the territorial integrity of Somalia” and used hashtags including #HandsOfSomalia [sic]. One can only presume them to have been a little illiterate and probably to have meant to have tweeted suggested “hands off” instead.
According to Mr Gordon: “The group purportedly behind the attack, Chuckling Squad, is a group of hackers who gained notoriety in 2019 for taking over a number of high-profile Twitter accounts, including those belonging to various celebrities and public figures.”
Though Morgan and Grant’s public spats have been longstanding, their pugnacity most definitely peaked in December 2019 when the pressman and the press reform campaigner “traded insults at each other for many hours” on Twitter.
In one missive, at that time, Morgan declared of Grant and fellow actor Steve Coogan sharing their views about the then ongoing general election campaign: “Who gives a flying f**k what Coogan and Grant have to say about this election? Honestly, the stupefying pomposity of these clowns trying to thwart democracy is beyond parody.” In another, he added: “I suggest you put the halo away, ‘Saint’ Hugh.”
Responding, before getting sent back pictures of himself after his 1995 arrest for participating in “lewd conduct” in a public place with Divine Brown near Sunset Boulevard, California, Grant observed: “Your paper caved and paid off millions to hundreds of victims of phone hacking. And issued grovelling apology. Those were the civil cases. As for criminal charges… I refer to my old friends Mr Tick and Mrs Tock. Happy Xmas.”
In January 2020, Morgan – whose full name is actually Piers Pughe-Morgan and whose birth name was Piers O’Meara – went further and branded Grant “a stuck-up arrogant twerp” and “disgusting” after the latter branded the election result “a catastrophe” and claimed “the country is finished.”
Marmite-like Morgan, loved and loathed in equal measure in Britain and beyond, attended a lunch in Mayfair just before Christmas earlier this month where fellow guests included not only his ‘Brenemy’Jeremy Clarkson, but also the Queen Consort, Camilla. Fans of the mendacious menace formerly known as Meghan Markle subsequently went mental.
Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party.
The veteran newsman’s account was targeted supposedly by a group named the Chuckling Squad, but it did also share a picture of someone who accompanied a picture with the hashtags #selfie and #Somalia.Pictured here with monstrous sex offenders Harvey Weinstein, Max Clifford, Rolf Harris, Gary Glitter and Ghislaine Maxwell, the Marmite-like figure of Morgan is someone whose controversial comments make him a natural target. His decisions to call out the Duchess of Sussex and to repeatedly involve himself with Donald Trump have also attracted ire and praise in equal measure.Some people have gone as far as to laud the former ‘Mirror’ editor a “National Icon” whilst others such as Lord Justice Leveson referenced his testimony under oath on phone hacking at the Leveson Inquiry as “utterly unpersuasive.” In May 2011, the journalist and broadcaster banned Hugh Grant from his shows “in perpetuity” after Grant “spoke out against the need for the tabloid press.”
Twitter users reacts to Piers Morgan’s account being hacked…
In using Twitter to share rabid rants about everything from Ribena to the royals, Omid Scobie simply shows himself as unprecedentedly awful
At Christmas some people hit the hooch whilst others hit the hay. Soppy scrag-end Omid Scobie, however, ain’t in that sphere and instead this week, he hit Twitter and went on a series of rabid rants about subjects ranging from Ribena to the royals.
In the most bizarre of his ‘Saviour’s Day’ period posts, instead of bowing down to his puppet mistress the Duchess of Sussex, this Cliff Richard-like oddity shared a picture of a Daily Mail headline banner featuring the Duchess of Cornwall and a child whose face he’d blurred. He grubbily accompanied it with the words: “Seriously, what is this sh*t?”
Given Mr Scobie supposedly aims at being some kind of holier-than-though woke warrior, his use of profanities might seem surprising, but actually they were instead indicators of the true character of this ex-clubbing bestie of the lump of junk that is Jodie Marsh.
As we move towards 2023 and a New Year in which PR peddling pillock Scobie will publish another tome of tediousness – this time titled Endgame (sadly it won’t be the end given his grim grift will no doubt then continue with Endgame 2 through to Endgame 100) – the Finding Freedom ‘co-author’ (who neglected to relay the involvement of the mendacious minx formerly known as Meghan Markle in that bargain bin book) decided to ask his followers a question.
He enquired: “What words do you feel are most overused in royal reporting?” before temptingly adding: “I’ll go first with ‘unprecedented.’”
Viewed by 254,000 people in less than 24 hours since and liked an astounding 2,600 times, this tweet was then followed with a discussion of how he and one of his groupies didn’t like the use of the word “that” being written in capital letters. How unprecedentedly dull this apologist for ‘Ginge and Cringe’ truly is. Now THAT’s over, next…
Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party.
Omid Scobie’s Christmas twittering spam…
Everything including reliable, Scobie had to make everything about himself and the woman that controls his every move this Christmas. Devoted and devoted in a deranged fashion, this moronic mouthpiece took to ‘the socials’ to declare:
“Was the great royal burgundy parade a cheeky swipe at Meghan? The evidence” clearly sent the ‘Finding Freedom’ author over the cliff and invoked fury in him unprecedented. One is only left wondering if his employers at Yahoo! consider this acceptable conduct for a journalist on their payroll. Shame on them for not calling out this very uncalled for use of the ‘s’ word.The modern-day version of the vapid vomit comet that is Pam Ayres then had to go further and asked his followers: “What words are most overused in royal reporting?” He sanctimoniously patronised his dimwitted devotees by declaring his dislike for the word “unprecedented.”He then got rather overexcited about the responses to his tweet and started, in a very childlike fashion, using emojis to express his delight that a few people were taking an interest in his frankly tedious topic. Clearly being ‘liked’ is something that Omid Scobie actually wants to achieve in 2023. To do so, he’ll need to think and learn that maybe distancing himself from ‘Ginge and Cringe’ is the only way of achieving such; back to Jodie Marsh for the Botoxed bore, we think.Concluding for Christmas, this senseless pest decided to share his views on Ribena – a perfectly likeable tipple that he clearly doesn’t like. Maybe he’s overdosed on it instead of the Kool Aid normally supplied to him by the demented dimwit formerly known as Meghan Markle.
Matthew Steeples salutes Jeremy Clarkson for expressing honest thoughts about the deviant Duchess of Sussex (and especially for causing the soppy snowflake that is ‘MeGain’s mouthpiece Omid Scobie to have a moronic meltdown as a result)
They say a “grifter’s gotta’ grift” and now that Omid Scobie’s been given another book deal courtesy of his ever-awful antics on behalf of his puppet mistress, the Duchess of Sussex, this PR peddling pillock had to yet again get his noxious knickers in a twist.
This time, Jeremy Clarkson – a man who may have finally found a subject of common ground with his love-hate rival Piers Morgan – wrote in The Sun of how much he loathes the meddling menace formerly known as Meghan Markle.
In his weekly column, Clarkson raged:
We all know in our heart of hearts that Harold Markle is a slightly dim but fun-loving chin who flew Apache helicopter gunships in Afghanistan and cavorted around Las Vegas hotel rooms with naked hookers.
But then along came Meghan, who obviously used some vivid bedroom promises to turn him into a warrior of woke.
And now it seems that she has her arm so far up his bottom, she can use her fingers to alter his facial expressions.
I actually feel rather sorry for him because today he’s just a glove puppet with no more control over what he says or does than Basil Brush.
Meghan, though, is a different story. I hate her.
Not like I hate Nicola Sturgeon or Rose West. I hate her on a cellular level.
At night, I’m unable to sleep as I lie there, grinding my teeth and dreaming of the day when she is made to parade naked through the streets of every town in Britain while the crowds chant, “Shame!” and throw lumps of excrement at her.
Everyone who’s my age thinks the same way.
But what makes me despair is that younger people, especially girls, think she’s pretty cool.
They think she was a prisoner of Buckingham Palace, forced to talk about nothing but embroidery and kittens.
That makes me even angrier. Can’t they see everything that’s happening is so very obviously pre-planned.
Leave the UK. Blame the royals. Do an interview with Oprah.
Get Basil Brush to write a book. Do a Netflix series — which should have been called A Woman, Talking Bollocks.
I can see it clearly. The studied pauses. The mock incredulity.
And the B-movie, soap-actress, quivery-voiced, more-in-sorrow-than-anger stories that are so obviously claptrap.
Do you really think she would have entertained a move to New Zealand? That’s 13 hours away from everything.
Responding on Twitter to a feature most definitely designed to stir-up the woke wazzocks of this world, the clearly very much unamused Finding Freedom ‘author’ and fake news muckspreader Scobie – whose next tittle-tattling tome, Endgame, will be speedily headed to the bargain basement bucket after publication on the 1st August 2023 – continued his ongoing attacks on the Queen Consort. Without using a question mark, the possibly 41-year-old (possibly older) ‘writer’ enquired:
“Would that be the same Jeremy Clarkson was at a private Christmas party with Camilla, the Queen Consort earlier this week (alongside guests including a Mail editor and Piers Morgan).”
Following up later, in a further muddled missive, the onetime clubbing chum of the lump of junk that is Jodie Marsh painfully prattled:
“Timewasters trying to pop up in my mentions saying Clarkson and the Queen Consort are not friends. The man literally spoke about their close friendship on ITV’s cooperative Camilla’s County Life documentary four months ago. Bye.”
Paraphrasing something Jeremy Clarkson once said of Piers Morgan back in December 2012, today we conclude: “Americans. It took us 35 years to get rid of Prince Harry. Please don’t send him or his wicked wife back and whilst you’re at it take in the rabid ratbag Omid Scobie along with the man who paid £12 million to a woman he’d supposedly never met, Prince Andrew. You can have his feckless wife, Fergie, as a ‘Brucie bonus’ given it’s Christmas. Thank you ever so much, thank you kindly.”
Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party. Follow Matthew Steeples on Twitter at @M_Steeples.
Pictured Top – Jeremy Clarkson brews beer and fools about on farms; he enjoys life and doesn’t take things too seriously. Omid Scobie, meanwhile, is simply an eternal misery and an arselicker of a mendacious meddler loathed by millions.
Prince Harry and his wife have brought more shame on the royal family in 2022 than even the mouthy moron Prince Andrew. In a year when we lost Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, that this pair decided to air their dirty linen on Netflix and Spotify is proof that they are utterly reprehensible and fit only to be sent to Siberia.After Jeremy Clarkson quite justifiably had a pop at the Duchess of Sussex, it was only to be expected that Omid Scobie would stick his rotten oar in. Reliably, when met with criticism of his whining, pathetic specimen Scobie ended another tweet about Clarkson’s article with a curt: “Bye.”It must be made clear that the ‘Finding Freedom’ author has another a book to peddle and his publishers must be giving him a bit of a hard time. Likely having had sent up a rocket up his never-sorry-arse, Scobie will likely now desperately spin all sorts of additional nonsensical yarns in the coming months.A job flogging French fries in McDonald’s might actually prove more appropriate for him by 2nd August 2023.Elsewhere on Twitter, further mockery of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex understandably followed in the wake of their disgraceful Netflix diatribe.
As fake news muckspreader Christopher Bouzy appears in Netflix’s ‘Harry & Meghan’ trailer, we remind readers of what a noxious nasty this reprehensible rubber-lipped rotter truly is
Better known as the online sensation ‘Yankee Wally,’ Quinlan provided entertainment to millions with her YouTube video missives where she shared her thoughts on the money-motivated-menace formerly known as Meghan Markle. She always brought joy, whereas Bouzy brought Barry Bollocks.
Aside from always beginning with the now much missed: “All my content is found on the public domain, it’s just my opinions and I play by the rules” [whatever they may be], Quinlan often remarked: “I thoroughly enjoy exposing the lies of Meghan Markle, and her husband is just as bad. I’m here till they lose titles and funding.” She was spot on in her analysis then and it is still as relevant now.
Now, bombastic bore Bouzy is trying get his revenge and in the tiresome trailer declared: “It’s about hatred. It’s about race.” After it released yesterday, the founder of the bag of bilge that is the Bot Sentinel founder pompously took to social media to declare:
“I guess I can officially announce I am in the Harry & Meghan docuseries.”
“I want to thank everyone who has supported Bot Sentinel’s research and allowed us to expose the targeted hate campaign against Harry and Meghan.”
Harry & Meghan premieres on Netflix tomorrow, Thursday 8th December, when tree episodes will air. An additional three installments will follow on Thursday 15th December and no doubt Christoher Bouzy’s “dirty games” will continue thereafter.
Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party or endorsed by Christopher Bouzy – a tedious twerp who bombarded Matthew Steeples with nonsense also. We’re lucky to be amongst the elite blocked by him on Twitter.
Matthew Steeples found interaction with the coder-turned-complete creep very odd, very odd indeed.‘The Times’ reacted to the Bot Sentinel founder appearing in the trailer by reminding its readers that the hateful horror had once nastily trolled the now Prince of Wales and in March 2021 remarked of him: “I am sorry but Prince William isn’t sexy, that is quarantine thirst talking. William looks like a balding Muppet.”Since declining to do the royal duties they ought jolly well have honoured, ‘Ginge & Cringe’ have lived beyond their means and made themselves out to be some kind of moral crusaders. This deranged duo have instead just turned themselves into international laughing stocks who simply live beyond their means.In the latest trailer, Prince Harry makes many a pop at his relatives and declares: “There’s a hierarchy of the family. You know, there’s leaking of stories, but there’s also planting of stories.”The Bot Sentinel founder likes to go to war with all sundry. Even Ellie Hall, a waste of space wack-job not a writer, has been subjected to being called “dishonest” by him in spite of him using her as a way of releasing “a steady flow of information.” This hypocrite deserves to be shown for what he is – rotten-to-his-never-sorry-core.Providing indication of how wicked and warped of mind he truly is, Bouzy took to Twitter on another occasion to share to mock Sadie Quinlan when it was announced that she was in hospital. This shameless cretin was then called out for being “the true hate troll he really is!” Sadly, it did not stop him continuing his hate campaign against an elderly Welsh woman, but equally, it unsurprisingly also did the opposite of what he desired and actually engendered yet more support for ‘Yankee Wally.’
Twitter reacts to the Bot Sentinel founder’s appearance in the latest Netflix trailer for ‘Harry & Meghan’…
WORLD EXCLUSIVE – Samantha Markle reacts to her sister Meghan’s Netflix trailer and the “inappropriate woke backlash” in the wake of the disgraceful mistreatment of Lady Susan Hussey
“When the stakes are this high, doesn’t it make sense to hear the story from us?” gushes the mendacious menace formerly known as Meghan Markle in the trailer for what its promoter has deemed a “Netflix global event.” Unsurprisingly, the teaser for the forthcoming bag of bilge that has been titled Harry & Meghan has already been watched 3.9 million times on YouTube alone.
Whilst a tiny minority no doubt think it acceptable for the feckless Duchess of Sussex to take a sum estimated as high as £81.3 million ($100 million, €94.9 million or درهم367.3 million) to spill her guts and those of her drippy, delusional, under-the-thumb husband without considering the fallout, her very own and by contrast sensible sister, Samantha Markle, last night reacted to it by quite rightly declaring:
“As I watched the Netflix trailer, I felt as though I was watching a Neil Sedaka style music video about a couple who believe its them alone with the world against them at all the odds.”
“It was my observation that with the love support and resources of the British royal family, that all of the odds were laid out before them, and in their favour until the point at which they seemingly wanted more and did not want to follow protocol, or be honest in their dealings.”
“Harry claimed that he would do whatever it took to protect his ‘family.’ We are confused because for all intents and purposes, the royal family certainly is a large, lifelong family, and worthy of said protection. The implication in the trailer, though, was that his ‘family’ only includes the Montecito microcosm and excludes the royal family and the Markles.”
“If they perceive their love as the two of them against the world in a Neil Sedaka style video, then it’s only them against the world, seemingly because they have lied about, isolated, attacked and damaged through public relations, a multitude of family members on both sides of the ocean.”
“It seems easy for them to deflect from accountability to others and recoil into their own menagerie of a microcosm, all the while packaging it as some heroic move that is worthy of awards and music, videos, and books and Netflix series. Most amazing about that trailer is its attempt to embody a fairytale at the expense of the tragedies, and tragic endings of others.”
“Respectfully, I have to say that we observed it from across the pond and it was quite shocking. Everyone I know supports Lady Susan Hussey. I was shocked at the inappropriately reactive, rather than proactive woke backlash that this lovely 83-year-old royal aide has suffered to the extent of her resignation and unjust social shaming.”
“I heard the questions that Lady Susan asked Miss Fulani and given several issues, I feel this was a tragic misinterpretation of communication.”
“Firstly, Ms Fulani was wearing a glaringly and culturally, symbolic clothing ensemble, which would arouse curiosity and questioning by any reasonable person where the attire is not customary for the region.”
“That being said, if someone were standing outside my home, wearing a Samurai ensemble or an Irish jigging ensemble or a sari, I would respectfully ask where the individual is from. If the individual said: ‘I am from here,’ I might be confused because of the unique clothing and further ask: ‘No, but where are you really from or where is your family from?’”
“I would likely be fascinated, and want to know the origins of such a unique outfit and the person wearing them. I might want to know about their family, and I would be delighted to hear more. Although, somehow that it is considered rude to ask, I think that it is rude not to ask, but rather to assume or stereotype.”
“Respectfully asking allows us to learn about other cultures and people, and this is how we grow and evolve in the large, multicultural world we live in.”
“Also, considerable and worthy of note is the fact that Lady Susan is 83-years-old and respectfully and diligently served the royal family for many, many years. She is of a different generation to Miss Fulani, so perhaps it would have been customary in most cultures to extend respect to the elderly and realise that she has a different perspective and set of norms about cultural exchange.”
“I think Lady Susan did the right thing and didn’t want to draw assumptions, but rather respected Miss Fulani by asking and caring enough to do so. Based on everything I have seen, it is my opinion that there was entrapment occurring. The set up was racially driven to stimulate controversy around the British royal family targeting an 83-year-old woman to make an example out of and to shame. It is inhumane in my opinion, and shame on those, who are so irrational, and not capable of personal integrity and maturity, or human compassion enough to find other ways to work out their personal issues regarding racism as it pertains to their own lives.”
“I think Lady Susan should have also been provided with the opportunity to learn about this woman’s culture, without being dismissed and socially shamed abruptly. This could have been a win-win situation, and given all factors and variables.”
“I believe that Lady Susan ought be restored of her dignity, respect, and social prestige that she has worked so long for, and does not deserve to be stripped of, because of what seems like a staged encounter to spin a narrative that raises the public hackles, and is unjustly damaging to the British royal family, and certainly to Lady Susan.”
“Lady Susan should be fully exonerated and this matter of seemingly false accusations, constituting, incitement and the abuse of an elderly citizen should be investigated.”
“I might also add that was has been said about Lady Susan assisting my sister at the behest of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth and reporting back that my sister was allegedly difficult seems to correlate with a motive of vindication. It is also reported that there is a link between the organisation Miss Fulani represents and my sister.”
“When I was getting my masters degrees and studying multicultural counseling, I learned that it is wrong to make assumptions about others cultures, and not ask questions, because that can be construed as stereotyping, and each individual within a population or cultural group, does not adhere to culturally specific norms. We respect individuals by asking them what their personal preferences are regarding communication and take it from there.”
“I just wanted to qualify in case anyone wonders why I am commenting when I’m not a British citizen. We are all human and with my degree in counseling, and what I know multicultural counseling I felt it was important to mention some aspects of that matter that many may have overlooked.”
Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party. Follow Matthew Steeples on Twitter at @M_Steeples.
Pictured Top (left to right) – A caricature doing the rounds of the Duchess of Sussex mocking her money motivated ways; Lady Susan Hussey, an 83-year-old whose mistreatment has been outrageous, and the then Meghan Markle with her sister, Samantha Markle, in happier times.
In exclusive comments to ‘The Steeple Times’ last night, Samantha Markle shared her views on the disgraceful mistreatment of Lady Susan Hussey and her thoughts on her sister’s forthcoming Netflix series. She tellingly observed: “As I watched the Netflix trailer, I felt as though I was watching a Neil Sedaka style music video about a couple who believe its them alone with the world against them at all the odds.”The mistreatment of Lady Susan Hussey that has followed the “racism storm” orchestrated by Ngozi Fulani’s decision to go public about something that should have been left private continues to dominate headlines. “Kiss Means War” declared ‘The Sun’ of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s “Netflix ambush” of the Prince and Princess of Wales’s US tour.Shared as screenshots by @lolamorrisons on Twitter an article from ‘The Sun’ that references how the late Queen tried to broker a “peace deal” provides further evidence of how mistreatment of others remains very much on the agenda of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.On social media, mistreatment was also on the agenda as a result of the Netflix trailing airing. The @RestingDollface account mused of one image shared: “Someone please get OPRAH on the phone. She needs explain how THIS pace was ‘so small they couldn’t stand-up in it,’ because us cost-of-living struggling plebs don’t understand.”
'I couldn't find the way they treated the Royal Family or our family anywhere in the dictionary under "protection"'.
Samantha Markle, sister of the Duchess of Sussex, reacts to Prince Harry saying "I had to do everything to protect my family", in the Sussexes' Netflix trailer. pic.twitter.com/716dxG5oZ0
