Meghan Markle plans to move to Los Angeles only after Trump leaves office, report

moosejive

Well-Known Member
I know right? Like i mentioned in other posts where are the rest of the Hollywood celebritites that vowed to leave America if Trump was elected
They threaten, but very few, if any ever follow through. I’m never really sure why though. Having visited other countries, they all seem to be decent places to live, but the celebs never go...?:confused There are a number that I would gladly help pack their bags too...;)
 
You don't have to worry, she's moving with Harry and the baby to our neck of the woods. Our BC media and population are used to Hollywood North celebs, we didn't bug them and gave them some much needed privacy over Christmas which they were grateful for.

It's either us or Toronto, and likely it's us, same time zone as Hollywood South. Easier commute. G and I take the Vancouver to LA flights often for cruising, and there's a lot of film stars you see in their off hours doing the commute. Nobody bugs them. Vancouver and BC in general does a lot of film work due to lower costs and taxes than California.

No good deed goes unrewarded though, and I'm just hoping they don't take that as an open invite for environmental activism or expecting our tax payers to take over from the British tax payers to foot the bill for their security. Charles can afford to do that!

There's been talk of allowing Harry to become Governor General of Canada (which is an office that is considered belonging to the Queen in it's role in our Parliament) and that wouldn't be good either as he and Meghan might take that to mean an open invitation to meddle in our politics.

I hope for 2 things:

1 They get the chance to have a life with a modicum of privacy and autonomy like all of us prefer. (and the chance to get SAVED!)

2 They mind their own business and don't meddle in our politics or our environmental concerns. It's none of their business.

As for the entourage that comes with them moving into my province, I don't care. If they want privacy people here usually don't pry.

I am not thrilled with the paparazzi that will follow, but perhaps we can discourage them, the paparazzi don't have an easy time of it here harassing celebs due to our laws so that might help.
I do offer my apologies for the American half of that debacle. Like other countries, we have to take back our citizens when required. But we kicked these royal creatures out long ago, and I'd prefer they stay up there, over there, any where but here.

I personally would give them no more privacy than any other citizen, and tell them to pay for their own extravagance.
 

TimeWarpWife

Well-Known Member
If their goal is "financial independence," then why aren't Harry and Meghan paying for their own security ~ or why have security at all? If you're aiming for financial independence, then you do what's necessary to achieve that goal by doing without things. It seems to me H&M want to be financially dependent on the British and now Canadians until they reach their own financial independence. Like all good liberals, they're full of hypocrisy. :mad:
 

antitox

Well-Known Member
Major Canadian newspaper says Meghan Markle, Prince Harry 'can't live' there

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/meghan-markle-prince-harry-major-canada-newspaper-royal-couple-cant-live-there

The Globe and Mail, one of Canada's biggest newspapers, appears to not be happy with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's decision to spend extended amounts of timein the country.

The paper published an editorial Monday titled "Harry and Meghan, and why members of the Royal Family can’t live in Canada," which says the relocation violates laws that keep Canada separated from the British monarchy that previously ruled over the country.


"In response to the sudden announcement of a vague and evolving plan for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex -- Prince Harry and Meghan -- to move to Canada while remaining part of the Royal Family, the Trudeau government’s response should be simple and succinct: No," according to the editorial, which referred to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

The article says that allowing the royal couple to live in Canada would disrupt efforts to maintain "Canada’s unique and highly successful monarchy."

“A royal living in this country does not accord with the long-standing nature of the relationship between Canada and Britain, and Canada and the Crown," the editorial said.

The article cites Britain's "class system with hereditary aristocrats" as a reason that Canada cannot allow Harry, 35, and Markle, 38, to live within its boundaries.

"What’s more, with the Statute of Westminster of 1931, Canada’s relationship to Britain was spelled out as one of equal, independent nations," the editorial explains.

"The Sussexes are working out their own personal issues, and Canadians wish them the best of luck," the paper added. "Canada welcomes people of all faiths, nationalities and races, but if you’re a senior member of our Royal Family, this country cannot become your home."

The paper, widely regarded as Canada's most reputable, finished by saying that the royals cannot use the nation as "a halfway house for anyone looking to get out of Britain while remaining a royal."

Harry and Markle announced last week that they plan to "step back" from their royal duties and split their time between London and North America. Following an in-person meeting between the senior members of the Royal Family, Queen Elizabeth II agreed to the couple's part-time move to Canada during a "period of transition."
 

athenasius

Well-Known Member
Major Canadian newspaper says Meghan Markle, Prince Harry 'can't live' there

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/meghan-markle-prince-harry-major-canada-newspaper-royal-couple-cant-live-there

The Globe and Mail, one of Canada's biggest newspapers, appears to not be happy with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's decision to spend extended amounts of timein the country.

The paper published an editorial Monday titled "Harry and Meghan, and why members of the Royal Family can’t live in Canada," which says the relocation violates laws that keep Canada separated from the British monarchy that previously ruled over the country.


"In response to the sudden announcement of a vague and evolving plan for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex -- Prince Harry and Meghan -- to move to Canada while remaining part of the Royal Family, the Trudeau government’s response should be simple and succinct: No," according to the editorial, which referred to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

The article says that allowing the royal couple to live in Canada would disrupt efforts to maintain "Canada’s unique and highly successful monarchy."

“A royal living in this country does not accord with the long-standing nature of the relationship between Canada and Britain, and Canada and the Crown," the editorial said.

The article cites Britain's "class system with hereditary aristocrats" as a reason that Canada cannot allow Harry, 35, and Markle, 38, to live within its boundaries.

"What’s more, with the Statute of Westminster of 1931, Canada’s relationship to Britain was spelled out as one of equal, independent nations," the editorial explains.

"The Sussexes are working out their own personal issues, and Canadians wish them the best of luck," the paper added. "Canada welcomes people of all faiths, nationalities and races, but if you’re a senior member of our Royal Family, this country cannot become your home."

The paper, widely regarded as Canada's most reputable, finished by saying that the royals cannot use the nation as "a halfway house for anyone looking to get out of Britain while remaining a royal."

Harry and Markle announced last week that they plan to "step back" from their royal duties and split their time between London and North America. Following an in-person meeting between the senior members of the Royal Family, Queen Elizabeth II agreed to the couple's part-time move to Canada during a "period of transition."
I hadn't seen that yet. The Globe and Mail is actually one of our best papers and still hold to a minimal standard of accuracy although they do have the usual bias.

I'm delighted to see their analysis! Somebody did some homework and digging for all that!

On the news last night it was reported that 79% of us don't want to spend one thin dime of tax payer money on their security needs, while only 3% didn't mind if we do pick up the tab and the rest didn't care. THAT gave me hope that Trudeau won't be able to slide this past the Canadian tax payers. For Canadians to have 79% of us in agreement is practically unheard of.

As for their privacy, as long as they pay their way (and that would INCLUDE PAYING CANADIAN INCOME AND PROPERTY TAXES) and don't expect us to pick up the tab, we would leave them alone. It's kind of a Canadian thing. It's considered deeply rude and intrusive to destroy someone's privacy even if they are a celeb of sorts.

However if they get themselves in the news all the time as it seems they might be doing already, then they are in for a rough ride. Privacy is for people who mind their OWN business and pay their OWN way.

Meghan was up to her tricks day before yesterday making the hop from Victoria on the Island, over to Vancouver to make a highly public visit to one of the very political hot potato areas in Vancouver, beloved of the leftists in search of votes. A Downtown East Side women's shelter. Women's shelters are great, but that one in particular is routinely used as a weapon by the left. And it was a photo op that was beautifully staged, complete with cheesy grins all round. For someone whose husband's mother died because of the paparazzi pursuit (which Diana courted btw), leaving her sons devastated, this is NOT A GOOD BEGINNING!
 

Andy C

Well-Known Member
I really dont understand the finer details of why this is such a big deal? If they want to quit the family business, whats the problem? Even Kings have abandoned their official position. Harry has slightly more than zero percent chance of ever being King, so if this couple wants a more normal life, good for them, his mom would be proud.
 

athenasius

Well-Known Member
I really dont understand the finer details of why this is such a big deal? If they want to quit the family business, whats the problem? Even Kings have abandoned their official position. Harry has slightly more than zero percent chance of ever being King, so if this couple wants a more normal life, good for them, his mom would be proud.
Just that it's another culture warrior from Hollywood and her culture warrior husband from the British monarchy moving to my province, and likely adding to the load of leftist lunatics and pressure tactics the left is fond of to make life difficult for our future elections, the oil pipelines, the mining industry, forestry and anything else that BC makes money off other than eco tourism which doesn't add up to a hill of beans.

I'm all for a normal life for them. I want an end to the monarchy, not them as people. I don't want to pay taxes to support their activist hobbies. I want them to shut up and mind their own business. I wouldn't care a bit if they moved elsewhere. Just NOT IN MY BACKYARD.

Yup I've become a NIMBY! Not In My Back Yard!
 

fl2007rn

Well-Known Member
I just saw on the news that Queen Elizabeth has made a final decision about Harry and Meghan. They will no longer use the HRH titles, will repay 2.4 mil pounds for public cash spent on Frogmore cottage, and receive no more public monies from the British people. I wish Harry and Meghan a happy life, but I think that Harry may regret this in the future.
 

moosejive

Well-Known Member
I just saw on the news that Queen Elizabeth has made a final decision about Harry and Meghan. They will no longer use the HRH titles, will repay 2.4 mil pounds for public cash spent on Frogmore cottage, and receive no more public monies from the British people. I wish Harry and Meghan a happy life, but I think that Harry may regret this in the future.
Ouch! That will pinch the royal foot... :0_O of Harry that is. Meghan has certainly polarized the royal family since she joined. I agree that they should be paying for their own security now and not burdening the Canadians with those expenses. Maybe the next baby will be born in Canada and have dual citizenship....;):whistle:heh
 

Footsteps

Well-Known Member
Would that make the baby an anchor baby? If the family left, would that make the anchor baby "once removed"? Or "twice removed" given that the parents were already removed from being royal? Is Frogmore Cottage the same as Toad Hall? If it's a cottage, why is it as big as a mall? If the couple was tired of all their appearances, why couldn't they just stay at Frogmore and order pizza? Then if they were going to be fired, couldn't they have negotiated severance pay? Could they have put themselves in a stronger position by agreeing to stop flying over London dropping leaflets that poked fun at Charles' huge ears?
Pay me no heed.
 

Spartan Sprinter 1

Well-Known Member
Ouch! That will pinch the royal foot... :0_O of Harry that is. Meghan has certainly polarized the royal family since she joined. I agree that they should be paying for their own security now and not burdening the Canadians with those expenses. Maybe the next baby will be born in Canada and have dual citizenship....;):whistle:heh
I just can't believe that her own family is constantly trying to attack her in the media all the time ????
 

athenasius

Well-Known Member
Looks like we are on the hook for the security detail costs. Even now that they are no longer HRH's they are legally designated as "international protected persons" and as such are entitled to protection at the cost of every host country as long as they are visiting.

Where we might be able to quibble is if they move here, they are no longer visitors. But I'm not holding my breath. My best hope is that they will prefer the weather in SoCal and move down there so she can have access to all the studios. Then you guys get to share in the joy of paying their security detail too!
 

fl2007rn

Well-Known Member
Looks like we are on the hook for the security detail costs. Even now that they are no longer HRH's they are legally designated as "international protected persons" and as such are entitled to protection at the cost of every host country as long as they are visiting.

Where we might be able to quibble is if they move here, they are no longer visitors. But I'm not holding my breath. My best hope is that they will prefer the weather in SoCal and move down there so she can have access to all the studios. Then you guys get to share in the joy of paying their security detail too!
I read that Harry and Meghan will be partnering with Netflix to produce shows and documentaries, and they also set up a non profit charity with Sunshine Sachs which is the same PR firm that represents the Clintons. It seems like they will be profiting from their royal affiliation and could easily pay for their own security in the near future. If they do move to the USA I would not approve of using our tax dollars to pay for their security.
 

TimeWarpWife

Well-Known Member
Looks like we are on the hook for the security detail costs. Even now that they are no longer HRH's they are legally designated as "international protected persons" and as such are entitled to protection at the cost of every host country as long as they are visiting.

Where we might be able to quibble is if they move here, they are no longer visitors. But I'm not holding my breath. My best hope is that they will prefer the weather in SoCal and move down there so she can have access to all the studios. Then you guys get to share in the joy of paying their security detail too!
Not as long as Donald John Trump is POTUS and has breath left in his body! :ahaha Why do you think Megs says she's not coming here until President Trump is no longer in office ~ she knows there's no way he'll agree to pay for anything concerning them and I absolutely agree with him. Of course, if the Dimwits ever get in control of the country, I'm sure they'll be more than happy to offer Megs and Har free food, housing, transportation, medical care, security ~ you know, treating them like they're one of their own, aka elitist Democrats.
 
Top