Meghan – aiming for the top spot

President Meg Mountbatten-Windsor is being punted as a future prospect if the Duchess of Sussex heads for Washington as she has hinted she’d like. The Royal title would have to be ditched or would be swiftly withdrawn, which may happen in any event, depending on behaviour ahead.

 She’s undoubtedly in a more ambitious phase of her life than Prince Harry with tr Saturn moving upwards towards her midheaven at the moment, hitting her high-visibility peak phase from 2026 till 2034. Not that it means a political career is guaranteed to happen but she does have a lucky, successful 22nd Harmonic which will bring her a global reputation – though it sits side by side with a strong, self-defeating 10th harmonic which can bring low what it initially boosted.

   Her chart is lower hemisphere with the exception of Mars in the 12th so she will tend to be subjective in her interests which might well count against an ‘outer’ political career working for the good of society.

  But her Jupiter Saturn conjunction does have the potential to amplify her ambitions and as a Leo Sun she’ll delight in being on a public stage.

  I’d have been inclined to dismiss it as a grandiose delusion on the part of a personality who loves to leap onto any liberal bandwagon going – a ‘rent-an-opinion’ to use a DM term. But her 22H is an eye-opener and she does have a ‘leadership; Leo North Node. And in the USA anything is possible.

  She will be pushing confidently ahead in 2027/2028 when tr Pluto is trine her Jupiter. Though tr Neptune in Aries is being less helpful in opposing her Saturn Jupiter conjunction and moving on to square her Mars and conjunct her Midheaven by 2030 which will undercut her forward gear.  

  As an avid Royal watcher I’ve been pondering on the bullying investigation triggered by staff complaints about her behaviour when in situ in the UK, which is now to be buried. All allegations were hotly denied by the Sussexes as smears or a misunderstanding about the American work ethic.

    One probable explanation came recently from a psychologist. “One of the great mysteries about dominating people is how big an asymmetry there is between how they experience themselves and how everyone around them does.”

  Too true. I once knew someone who was a control-freak and a bully as far as others were concerned, while she insisted on seeing herself as this poor downtrodden little worm inside. It was bizarre and she was utterly astonished to hear that others perceived her as a strong pushy personality. The inner and the outer – a gulf apart.

  Meghan does have Pluto in the 4th which will make her insecure and grab for control as a defence, a legacy from a high-tension childhood. She also has a volatile Mars in emotional Cancer square Saturn and Moon which will make her ratchety and inclined to snap.

 The media is up in arms about the independent bullying investigation not being published but I wonder if there isn’t an ulterior motive – apart from not wishing to inflame an already aggravated family situation. The Sussexes’ Jubilee visit which in advance I thought would be a mistake turned out to have been cleverly handled. There were no photo ops for later use by Netflix etc which I half suspected was the only reason they turned up. And as far as reports suggest they had limited contact with the wider family including William and Kate who were busy glad-handing round the country.

  The bullying investigation now hangs like a Sword of Damocles over the Sussexes’ heads. Harry’s shock-horror, no doubt ghost-written, memoirs and further Oprah type grievance-airing may well risk it being published. There may be an attempt at a – “we’ll shut up if you shut up” – deal.

 Relations between Meghan and the Royal are not improving. It’s tricky with the Queen’s chart since she is the age she is, but assuming she stays as bright as she is, then their relationship is deteriorating over this year and the next two. Will is aggravated with her and vice versa right through till 2024/25. Prince Charles, never happy with confrontations, will have glimmers of hope this July but 2023/24/25 look tense and frustrated between them. Princess Anne is not amused also over the next three years.

  This psycho-family drama will run and run and the mystery is how a Netflix et al funded career will survive if the Royal connection is is muted down to a faint whisper. Royal courtiers have centuries of experience at putting parvenus in their place. You cross or try to upstage the monarch at your peril.

See previous post for detail on Prince Harry – April 15 2022.

108 thoughts on “Meghan – aiming for the top spot

  1. I recently read that both Meghan and Harry were given their titles just prior to their marriage taking place. Which to me sounds like she accepted those titles independently. In other words they were being given to her, irrespective of her being married. Because they had not been married yet. So it means that she accepted the titles. Or at least that is my understanding of the situation. It does strike me as odd that the Queen would choose to go about it this way. But then again, the advice given her in recent years seems to have have been way off key!

  2. I may not be in the loop
    With her and Harry but I don’t hear anything about them in the states, of course I don’t follow them. I really can’t see her going anywhere politically. But I didn’t see it with Trump and look where that got us!

    • Harry (no doubt with the connivance of Meghan) is trying to take on the whole British legal system. His latest challenge at the UK High Court is in regard to a supposed right to special police protection when in the UK – despite his having stepped down from Royal duties and living in exile in California.

      He allegedly offered to pay the costs himself but a ‘rent a cop’ scheme for royalty or celebrities is a definite no no. Who decided that? Well the UK government (via the Home Office) and the Queen (via her private secretary). Even though the Queen is the Head of State, Harry apparently believes she should have had no input into the decision.

      According to some UK newspapers, Harry and Meghan’s next legal action will be against the Queen’s private secretary for conveying the Queen’s opinion to the committee which made the decision – in fact being on that committee.

      Clearly Harry thinks that, having been born a Royal and Meghan having become a Royal by marriage, they are more important than the British Government and equal in status to the Queen! The saga will continue indefinitely – at any rate as long as Prince and Princess Harry (their correct title) believe they have inalienable rights as a result of his birth as a Prince.

      Take no notice of Harry saying he was now writing his memoirs “not as the prince I was born but as the man I have become”. Some think he is still a child for behaving as he does – certainly not a man.

      It couldn’t happen in America – although you did have Trump I suppose………

        • Neptune in its own sign is very powerful with additional help from the sextile with Pluto? The delusion is real across the board. Not just with Harry.

          • Thats what I meant JE delusions in general not just Prince Harry whose mental health I am a little concerned about.
            I was also thinking of Boris Johnson and some of the wannabes who would like to succeed him etc etc
            Isn’t Neptune also associated with spirituality? I don’t know much about astrology but it interests me

          • @Josie yes definitely agree with you.

            Yes, Neptune is spirituality too. Not sure whether it needs to link to another planet for that. One of the astrologers on this forum would be able to say more.

      • Marjorie, how bloody depressing! H used to be quite sensitive and down to earth, with humour and character… but M has woked him into dangerous territory. Neither of them has a worry in their tiny heads, they are so protected, it will take a generation perhaps for him to realise life does not owe him, whoever he is. He can change his mindset, without looking desperately backwards at his youth, let it go and let it be…..unfortunately he has the wrong partner for that scenario……its sad, he’s a decent man, fairly straightforward, who’s been a victim of his time- wokism……pass the gin…and the loaded gun.

  3. Jane:

    When Liz replied to my post about Lydon, I realized that there was much more to be said. But when I looked back, I had typed 7 pages, had about 20 charts open on a 15″ laptop, my neck hurt, and I was far from finished. It seemed a better idea to mull on all this for a while, so I decided I am going to write it all out and see if anything interesting happens. Glad it set you going!

    • Kat – just seen this! Somewhat distracted by UK politics at the moment…..it’s so interesting about John Lydon, and the whole 70’s era, especially now with threatened strikes, inflation, and so on. I was thinking too about pinning down the time when Queen Victoria was very unpopular, due to her non-appearance in public when she was a widow. I think there were questions in Parliament about it, and the Royal Family’s role. Be interesting to see how the UK chart was affected (or not) at that time. Anyway, thank you!

  4. Liz:Leo is a bullying sign, she has a heavy Leo first, probably largely untamed. Harry and Meghan had Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs), which make the infantile mind triage experience and thought, and prioritize what is most urgent in order to survive. This in turn makes maturation asymmetric and delayed. Both spouses are doing an awful lot of growing up in public.

    She also has Saturn conj. the moon in air in the 3rd. Saturn on a luminary can make people’s words insensitive and lacking in empathy, and Libra can be chill-minded. With all that Leo in the first, and air in the third, empathy when she addresses others might be lacking. Worse, with Saturn conj. Jupiter and the Moon she FEELS that she’s right, and just, and if others resent it, so be it.

    Wasn’t speaking to others abusively what got Ellen De Generes kicked out of her once TV sinecure? I don’t watch TV, and have never seen the show and know nothing about the woman, but I remember headlines. In any case, I think that, if Meghan fulfills her ambitions, which Marjorie thinks may be in the stars given the 22 Harmonic, she will have to learn to be nice to others.

    An emphasized Neptune can mean there is an imperative to create a persona to deploy parts of the persona in pubic, but not all the self. Neptune rising in the 22 Harmonic is a very emphasized Neptune. And in the natal, Pluto, which, among other things, potentiates any planet, is sextile Neptune. She has a temporary Yod to her natal Pluto and Neptune with the Solar Arc MC as the focal point, which may be creating pressure to change and actualize. If Marjorie is right and there was a “We’ll shut up if you shut up” deal with the royals, this yod may wake Meghan up to the need to transform herself (Pluto) to create a nicer public persona (Neptune) to deploy herself in her career (SA MC), and weigh the costs of not doing so.

  5. Liz:
    Iinteresting note about glamour’s original meaning. I had no idea. But just to clarify: I meant glamour in the modern sense, not the archaic one.

    1. an attractive or exciting quality that makes certain people or things seem appealing: the glamour of Monte Carlo | [as modifier] : the glamour days of Old Hollywood.

    • beauty or charm that is sexually attractive: pile hair up for evening glamour | George had none of his brother’s glamour.

    -0-

    In the sense that the British Royal Family is the living symbol of the fertility and capacity for renewal of the British people, then, arguably, the glamour of any of them may be immaterial. But the monarchy, and people’s attitudes about it, have evolved just like everything else. And not everybody views the matter the way you do. For instance: here are 4 verses of God Save the Queen, by John Lydon, an English singer:

    God save the Queen
    ‘Cause tourists are money
    And our figurehead
    Is not what she seems

    That was the mid-seventies. After all these years, the government speaks openly as the royals being a tourist attraction. Arguably, as such, the monarchy is in great part about glamour, in the modern sense. In my opinion, looking into Harry’s and Meghan’s charts is much more rewarding if you spend some time thinking about the relationship between glamour and Harry’s families. It’s really one of THE keys to understanding Harry’s chart, in fact.

    Do Harry and Meghan have a role in the modern world?
    They already do. This is why we talk about them. Their role is evolving as we speak.

    You and I might see these people and their charts from a slightly different angle because Harry’s Moon on her Chiron is on my Mercury, so we’re connected through Algol, Meghan’s NN and SN are on my IC/MC, Harry’s Mercury is conjunct my Uranus (astrology), in virgo (analysis). It’s kind of the Cosmobiology way to eliminate degrees of separation, I guess.

    I think everybody has encountered that sort of thing.

    • John Lydon, aka Johnny Rotten, was lead singer of the Sex Pistols in the 1970s and an Irish anti establishment punk rocker. He may have seemed glamorous to a certain section of the youth of the UK but was certainly not mainstream. With an impoverished background, kicked out of school at 15, dropped out of college and homeless, he represented the worst aspects of our society at that time. One plus is that he (and his mates) might have been influential in the decision by the Prince of Wales to set up his Trust in 1976, which was dedicated to improving the lives of disadvantaged young people in the UK.

      Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

      As for the origin of ‘glamour’ and it’s identity with magic spells, I am taken with the idea that articulate women accused of witchcraft were considered to weave magic spells with their words. They were not all poor and disadvantaged. Ann Boleyn springs to mind – though not charged with witchcraft (seduction) it was a notion popularised by her enemies at court. Verbal seduction wasn’t though legally acceptable so it was replaced with false allegations of sexual seduction at her trial.

      Meghan Markle certainly has a way with words and could be a public speaker of some merit – as the Oprah interview demonstrated. If she used her skill in this respect for the public good instead of using it to trash her family and the family of her husband, then I could see a public role for her, even in politics.

      What puzzles me (and maybe the answer does lie in her astrological chart) is the way she allegedly resorted to bullying tactics instead of persuasion with her staff. Whatever the truth, the complaints were too numerous to ignore.

      • Kat, Liz – thanks for linking John Lydon and Meghan! If you look at their natal charts, and then at the UK 1801, there are some interesting patterns.
        For instance – UK Mercury – youth and media, in this instance anyway – is 17 Sagittarius. John Lydon’s creative Venus is 16 Pisces, Meghan’s 13 Virgo. Lydon, who said “anger is an energy” has his energy planet, Mars, at 11 Sagittarius, conjunct NN 14 Sagittarius (the angry masses) – the punk movement sprang from the terrible financial conditions of the time, when so many young people felt there was no hope, jobs, or anything else. His Mars/Nodes shake up the UK Mercury’s philosophy.

        As ‘disruptors’ of the status quo you can look at Meghan’s Uranus, 26 Scorpio, which squares the UK Saturn at 23 of royal Leo, disrupting the ‘fixed’ royal rules? Her NNode at 1 Leo is conjunct all the pomp and glamour of UK Jupiter at 1 Leo. She was fascinated by British royalty as a young girl, apparently.
        Lydon’s Uranus, 29 Cancer, is conjunct UK Jupiter. He has his quirky, outspoken Mercury at 2 Aquarius (the collective),opposing UK Jupiter. His Saturn in Sagittarius squares UK Pluto at 2 Pisces. And his blaring Jupiter/Pluto conjunction in Leo is conjunct that UK Saturn (establishment). No wonder the Sex Pistols created such controversy! There are more connections, these are just a few examples.

        It seems, generally, that individuals come along at various times to ‘channel’ or represent certain themes in the collective. The astrology is reflected in events and people around us, it is neither ‘good’ or ‘bad’, and these patterns can express themselves/manifest in a variety of ways. But express themselves they will.

        • It is a pity we don’t have a birth date for Ann Boleyn. She certainly disrupted court life and was the force behind the English Reformation – Catholicism to Protestantism and all that entailed.

          I am not sure what theme in the collective Meghan Markle is channelling. She can’t influence racism given that she has walked away from the UK; and certainly won’t ‘modernise’ either Charles or William. The rags to riches tale is also a non starter – she was raised as comfortable middle class not deprived working class. Maybe something will emerge in the next few years.

        • Very interesting @Jane. So the UK Jupiter as a teacher to Meghan’s NN stands out for me. They also say it is usually the NN person who will leave if they are not ready? This was all meant to be!

          • That makes perfect sense. Meghan wanted to ‘hit the road running’ when she obviously wasn’t ready. Her friends, including Michelle Obama, told her to take things slowly as did members of the Royal Family – but she wouldn’t, or couldn’t, listen.

          • Yes, I think you’re right Jennifer. Clearly, there are choices, but the basic ingredients for the astro recipe have been selected! Jupiter/Nodes can be fortunate meetings or connections, which Meghan certainly made when she met and married Harry. What she chose to do with all of that, now and in future, is where she might learn something.

            As for Liz’s point about Anne Boleyn, there is a date of birth that’s been refined by historians in recent years, based on a letter she wrote from the French Court as a girl. It may not be bang on. But 5 May, 1501 (JC) has her Uranus at 3 Pisces, conjunct UK 1066 Pluto 3 Pisces, and close to UK 1801 Pluto too. This squares the 1066 Jupiter at 7 Virgo, and her own Saturn at 6 Gemini. Her NN would be conjunct UK Neptune in Taurus.

          • Thanks Jane. Wow.

            I am concerned that sometimes, when an historical birthdate is missing, a chart may be compiled to fit the events. But Uranus and Pluto with all the spiritual upheaval in England…..well!

            I find this particular thread fascinating – perhaps we all find anti establishment figures fascinating. The use of the word ‘glamour’ is particularly intriguing because in the UK it is considered slightly sleazy. For example Malcolm Mclaren (the manager of the Sex Pistols) and his partner Vivienne Westwood (the punk fashion designer) named their original shop ‘Rubberwear, Glamourwear and Stagewear’.

            It is not fair to condemn Meghan (though she has brought it on herself with the Oprah interview) but there is definitely something ‘not nice’ about her demeanour . To single out her last appearance, she walked up the steps and into St Pauls wiggling her bum as if she were still on ‘deal or no deal’ – and this in front of the numerous members of the armed forces in her vicinity who were standing to attention. She also cinched in her expensive coat with a belt to give herself a curvier figure – throwing the whole outfit out of shape and making the coat look as if it was bought ‘off the peg’ rather than ‘made to measure’. [Compare the hang of her clothes to those of Catherine, Camilla and the Queen.]

            If this sort of thing is done to get attention, it is working – but in quite the wrong way. Someone should tell her. Perhaps they have tried and perhaps she simply can’t take constructive criticism.

      • During a recent chat with Piers Morgan, Lydon was asked about his views on the royal family. When Morgan questions the singer about the song, Lydon clarifies, “It’s anti-royalist, but it’s not anti-human.
        “I’ve got to tell the world this,” he says. “Everyone presumes that I’m against the royal family as human beings, I’m not.”.
        Raising his hand to his brow to offer a salute, he continues, “I’m actually really, really proud of the Queen for surviving and doing so well.
        “I applaud her for that and that’s a fantastic achievement. I’m not a curmudgeon about that.”
        Defending his views in the song, Lydon adds: “I just think that if I’m paying my tax money to support this system I should have a say so in how it’s spent.”

  6. I think she would have trouble in the debate process, both against other Democrats, and then against the Republicans. This is not an easy process. The endless campaigning, state to state.

    • KT
      If its true she created such upset with a few palace workers, a story which never changes – how can she handle people/teams etc, which are integral to political people? Even Presidents need strong social graces, and a compass for the beliefs and feelings of others. In that position, you also can’t pick and choose those things – does she even qualify on that level?

  7. “[Meghan] has glamour through marriage to the royals. The glamour is due to the royals only causally. Since Diana, the American public hasn’t really related to any of them personally, with the exception of the Queen, and that is tenuous: on the whole, Americans outside California, don’t like old women in government. The glamour of Meghan is that of an American princess: She made it into Buckingham Palace, and her Dad is just some dude who could be anybody’s Dad.”

    Since you emphasis ‘glamour’, it is worth looking at the meaning of the term. Historically it originated in Scotland and referred to a ‘magic spell’, cast by language and literature as much as anything else. Nowadays, in regard to Holywood or even the American Presidency, it is the woven words as well as the screen images which create the ‘magic’ or ‘glamour’ (ie the excitement and allure).

    Members of the British Royal Family are not expected or required to be ‘glamorous’ in the American sense of the term. They are part of a pageant which relies heavily on tradition and symbolism to express the continuity of the British way of life and the unity of the people. As Prince Philip repeatedly said, the people flock to see the ceremonies, not the individuals per se.

    Meghan as an actress should have known that the play is more important than the cast – that individuals can easily be replaced and the show will go on. She and Harry really should have made more effort to join in and play the parts they were allocated. What on earth were they thinking when they decided to set up an alternative court in the US centred on themselves? Did they really believe that the ‘glamour’ and ‘magic’ of the British Monarchy was transferable to California (or anywhere else it wasn’t already established for that matter)?

    Whatever the astrological charts might say, I can’t see a future global role for either of them. They had the chance with the Commonwealth and blew it. I think they will blow any further opportunity offered to them.

  8. Some years ago, someone, I think it was Howard Stern, asked Trump if he was planning to run for president. Trump asked “Me? Noooo…, and guffawed, as if this could happen in pig’s eye. At that point he didn’t stand a chance. Years later his time came. Since this happened, everyone thinks they could give it a go. Is Meghan one of these people?

    Apparently, the election of the US president is related to the 22° degree of Gemini in the birth chart or harmonic, or by Solar Arc, progression, transit, or solar return.

    Tucker Carlson’s Solar Directed Saturn is on 22 Gemini in 2022. I think it’s he, not Meghan, who might be eyeing the presidency. Establishing relationships with Orban, Putin, Bolsonaro, and in the Media, to Glenn Greenwald (who may bring in a few progressives and independents) sounds like he’s forming the alliances he will need if he manages to run. He has Chiron (rotten luck) conjunct the MC of career and government, which may indicate that he doesn’t feel as successful in his career as would prefer. There’s a bleeding wound there. Like Limbaugh, he might have turned conservative because that’s where the money was (Venus in Aries is enterprising), and he is lucky with money, so $ is Tucker’s default. I think he wanted to be taken seriously but was just not outstanding or popular enough in the mainstream. Like a centaur, the career Carlson cut his losses, came up with a viable alternative for mega success, and has a huge audience, and a respectable career in republican circles. But the wound still smarts: this the effect of Chiron. But does it apply to a candidate for office? He has not yet said he’s interested in running for office. But the moves he’s making toward autocratic leaders is a good indication that he’s thinking of political office and is checking the lay of the land internationally speaking.

    On the other hand, Venus in Aries (weak) is a seducer. He’d enjoy the chase for votes and the battle to defeat his opponent. And he might stand a good chance with Republicans. Schwarzenegger’s media personal is WHAT got him elected. If he was on the ballot today, Tucker might get about the number of that voted for Bernie, which is a start.

    As for Meghan: She doesn’t see herself clearly, which means others don’t see her clearly either. But she has glamour through marriage to the royals. The glamour is due to the royals only causally. Since Diana, the American public hasn’t really related to any of them personally, with the exception of the Queen, and that is tenuous: on the whole, Americans outside California, don’t like old women in government. The glamour of Meghan is that of an American princess: She made it into Buckingham Palace, and her Dad is just some dude who could be anybody’s Dad. This is exciting to Americans, it’s like a rags to riches story only in terms of class and race, it’s fascinating. And her chart bears more than a few similarities to Diana’s, notably, an emphasized Chiron and a good bit of Leo. But Americans can relate to Meghan more: she’s an American, and displays more venality, and is more of a beauty than Diana. Harry’s attraction and marriage to her may rest on the similarities between Meghan and his mother. This would fit Freud’s theories of the family romance and its effect upon Harry’s choice of partner and her own. But Meghan is no “I vow to thee my country“, type. Meghan vows to self and family exclusively: just like the electorate of the US, a nation with a Cancer Sun.

    I think that given her experiences after her wedding, marriage and childbirth, her Leo heavy 1st house needs to stand out.

    Her Solar Arc Neptune oppose her natal NN might mean even greater confusion for a while, as Neptune opposes her Mercury, and later the Sun. These transits in turn will motivate her even more to re-think her public self and her career. She’s taking stabs at different roles, trying them for size, but she’s doing in pubic, because everything she does now happens in the public eye, which means that she’s getting a bit of egg in her face.

    The Progressed chart for the 4th of July has Chiron on the MC conjunct Algol, which will be there for some time. My feeling is that Meghan will have a painful time career-wise. Algol is conj. the Solar Return MC this year, but this might be related to her husband’s family home and not the career. There might be setbacks this year that will call for learning some resignation, to accept what cannot be and will never be, and to rely on inner resources to regroup and redirect, and find success in a different way (Chiron).

    Meghan’s Algol on the MC would clearly not be a deterrent for the American electorate: Trump has the ASC and MC only a couple of degrees away from Meghan’s Progressed ASC and MC. But Trump has a parans conjunction of Regulus on the ASC conj, Mars, and he has the Sun on 22 Gemini by birth. Meghan has none of these things.

    Venus rules Meghan’s Progressed MC debilitated in Scorpio. Uranus on the IC opposes Chiron. In both the Solar Arc chart and the Progressed one she has a yod of Pluto sextile Neptune with Chiron as the finger to the yod. In the Solar Arc Chiron is the focal point of the yod at 02 cancer, 11 house. In the progressed chart the focal point of the yod is Chiron on a parans conj. to the MC oppose Uranus on the IC.

    One last note: her solar return for August 5th has a Gemini ASC and Mercury conjunct Regulus on 0 Virgo, and Saturn dignified at the Aquarius MC.

    Does any of this sound like she might run for pres?

  9. I’ll repeat, never underestimate a Leo sun! Especially one with an Aries MC. She’s no snowflake. She can use her Cancer asc. to be charming as is necessary.
    She still has time on her side to enter politics in some capacity. The Abortion upheaval is an opportunity she can capitalize on.

  10. It was my understanding, that once you accept a title you can never become president. Some even say that you cannot enter politics at any level. So maybe her statement about being an activist not a politician is true.

    • “No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.” – U.S. Constitution, part of Article 1, Section 9. If she didn’t totally renounce any Royal connection before running for President, I think there’s a good chance her candidacy would get contested and the review would wind up in the Supreme Court, which would likely make a ruling that she’s ineligible.

      “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.” From Article 2, Section 1. This is why Governator Schwarzenegger, born outside the U.S. and not to U.S. citizens, couldn’t run for President.

      It’s possible but, by design, very very difficult to amend the U.S. Constitution. Laws that conflict with it are discarded when the challenge eventually reaches the courts.

      • But of course *she* has not been granted any title of nobility. She is using a title granted by English law and custom to the wife of the Duke of Sussex, who was the person granted the title.

        If she were to run for President, it would be an interesting question, as she was not granted the title herself, but she is, by English law, a peeress (by marriage).

        Of course, if she wants to dispense with the title, either just for herself or for both Harry and her, an Act of Parliament can be rushed through in a day to take away her/their title.

        • You’re probably technically right. But, I could see the whole question being pushed by people who have some other grind to axe too, and this would be their chance shove their favorite hobby-horse issue into the Supreme Court. Which as we’ve seen is far from politically neutral, wise oracles from on high these days.

  11. The tabloids are at it again? Stay in the UK they are a target, live in the US they are still a target. The woman is more an activist, not a politician and she would be dumb as a doornail to run for president. She might do well as a UN ambassador- maybe in connection with child health or arts and culture or similar. As a Leo woman I get so tired of strangers attributing ambitions to me that I never actually had and I’ve seen it with other Leo women too. A lot of us do the work and go home to peace and quiet, like Kate Bush for example. She has children that she wants to raise in peace and dignity and a husband that I believe she truly adores. Leo isn’t always about grandstanding or public leadership, sometimes it’s about protecting the vulnerable. American politics does not allow for that.

    • Well Meghan is apparently signing letters to politicians and media people in the US as ‘Meghan, Duchess of Sussex’. If that isn’t grandstanding, I don’t know what is.

      Incidently, she even misuses her style or title. Meghan, Duchess of Sussex would only be correct if she was widowed or divorced and there was another Duchess of Sussex as a consequence. She obviously wants a foot in both worlds – Meghan representing the private self and Duchess of Sussex representing the public self. But she can’t have it both ways.

      Harry and Meghan are a target even whilst living in the US primarily because their use of Royal titles when making political statements is bringing the Queen and rest of the Royal Family into disrepute. Meghan in particular is deliberately trying to control and dominate the narrative – with little regard or respect for the British monarchy as a public institution.

      • I was watching Wimbledon yesterday and they had a parade of champions to celebrate 100 years of centre court. I was reminded that Roger Federer is born only 4 days later than MM. Admittedly a Scorpio moon is much more private but I doubt you could find a more dignified Leo than him. I always felt the knock-on was Nadal, Djokovic and Murray who followed as champions, felt they had to be as gracious and humble in victory and complementary of their opponents as he was.

        • Please Marjorie, can you look at Nick Kyrgios? No quiet dignity going on there! I read an article that suggested he was a bit of a tortured soul. I did enjoy his doubles win at the Australian Open.

    • You are so interesting and deep usually Marjorie. But Meghan seems to press buttons. “Parvenu” gives it away.

      • I’m not good with egos especially when they are not backed by any substance. It probably was pejorative but I’d have said the same about myself if – heaven forfend – I had married into the Royals. She sailed in arrogantly assuming she could subvert the system and get it all her own way. If you’re going to try to buck a system at least have the sense to find out how it works first of all – and that takes time.

    • “she would be dumb as a doornail to run for president.”

      Being dumb as a doornail is not an obstacle to being elected President of the Unites States. See “The Former”.

  12. I loved the Queen’s response to the Oprah interview:

    “The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan. The issues raised, particularly that of race, are concerning. While some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately. Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved family members.”

    What’s to say a political career won’t be even more challenging for Meghan and Harry Mountbatten-Windsor? But at least Harry’s job as chief impact officer with BetterUp, a mental fitness consultancy company, will ensure they have access to mental health experts if and when they need it.

    • What an absolutely perfect and gracious response by the Queen, to the airing of the family’s dirty laundry.
      She’s always been a remarkable, distinguished representative of the best of dignified British traditions.
      Recognized that at her level, there may have been an impressive team of writers to help with exactly the right words. Even so, they are true to what she’s known for.

  13. Have always been puzzled re Meghan’s 4th house Pluto, and despite huge criticism for leaving her father in the dust, she has remained firm on this issue. She must have her reasons.

    • It is a very Plutonic – possessive, controlling – relationship. Though I suspect there was also a hint of feeling he wasn’t quite good enough to mix in the rarefied circles she was marrying into. Bit of a family embarrassment.

      • @Marjorie, I also note the “out of step with the family/culture” quality of Meghan’s Pluto via her paternal relationship. In my own case, I was the “reject” with my father’s family. My grandparents were Puerto Rican, and my grandmother frequently called me “gringa” and “fea” (ugly). My mom was white. Let us not forget “abusive” as a Plutonian characteristic. Her being the product of a “mixed” relationship may well be part of her Pluto story. I don’t at all doubt her father was abusive toward her, though, obviously, not necessarily for that particular reason. That said, 4th house stuff is also, by definition, deeply buried stuff.

    • @Jac Stewart, I also have a 4th house Pluto (mine is also tightly conjunct the IC), so I interpret it on a very personal level. Pluto in any landscape is where you can find things that are corrupt, tainted, toxic. Considering the early childhood/ancestral quality of the 4th house, I very much doubt that Meghan is the one at fault for how that relationship has played out. While the world’s judgments about it really make no difference, the 4th house Pluto tells me she had valid reasons for doing this. I have seen and read many anecdotes from others with a 4th house Pluto where the father is somehow “removed” from the home environment via divorce, abandonment, death, etc.—and often when the child is close to or had just entered their teen years. In my case, my father died of cancer when I was 13, as Pluto was transiting over my 4th house Sun. It was both devastating and a relief; he was an ill-tempered man, and I both loved him and was frightened of him.

    • With her Libra moon – it could simply be that he wore odds socks at her first wedding. The rationalisations Libra moons will make to justify cutting someone out are surprisingly wild.

      I’ve also experienced a few women ghosting me the moment it starts to get intimate or challenging for them. Maybe the reason she doesn’t want anything to do with him, is that his Cancer Sun wants to bring up the emotional stuff that her Libra planets are incapable of handling?

      4th/10th houses are usually said to represent the mother and father. There are various beliefs about this, one being that the mother is 4th, father 10th; another being that the 10th represents the notable parent, the 4th the hidden parent. In both cases, I’d Meghan’s father is the visible one and therefore represented by the 10th. So that would put her mother as the 4th.

      In any discussion of MM, her mother Dorian(?) is never considered as the problem. And Meghan’s Libra moon is conjunct both Jupiter and Saturn. That’s a confusing influence of one moment being encouraged to spread your wings, and the next having them clipped. I’m tempted to think that her mother is the underhand, controlling presence pulling strings in the background.

      Bear in mind that Harry thinks his father is the problem, yet his mother is the notable applecart upsetter. Children of divorced parents can side with the ‘wrong’ parent for many years before seeing the line.

      Just food for thought from an astrological perspective.

      • I must say I have often wondered about her relationship to her mother which on the surface seems affectionate and tight – but Meghan has a Moon Saturn Jupiter square Mars and that is a disharmonious connection. You’re right about children splitting into good parent/bad parent when sometimes it is not that simple.

        • I’ve read that Cancer moons or risings are always close to their mothers. Even if the relationship can be testy at times, they’d never be estranged from or abandon them.

          • I have cancer moon/cancer ascendant, and had a horrendous relationship with my mother. Mind you, my moon is opposition Saturn. I’ve been estranged from my mother for decades. Funnily enough, though, I haven’t ‘abandoned’ her – she lives on my mind and life daily, via PTSD and lifelong ramifications of her abuse and neglect. I am still struggling to get away from her (malign influence). So I think cancer moons do indeed have deep ties to their mother, but not necessarily in the accepted way. Although it must be said, there were very deep feelings there – I loved her intensely as a child, but it was unrequited, but certainly, my relationship to my mother has shaped my life profoundly.

        • I was interested in this Gnarlydude so tried it with my own family charts. My mother’s sun was in my 4th house and my father’s moon was in my 10th .Likewise our son has his father’s sun is in his 10th whilst his moon is in my 10th.Not quite sure of the significance of all of this but fascinating.

      • Gnarly Dude, Saturnine Moon mothers tend to lay a lifelong guilt trip on their children to make them feel they (the kids of whatever age) are responsible for their unhappiness. Dumping the guilt and realising it is the mother’s issue not yours isn’t remotely easy and probably trickier with a Cancer Moon but if it can be done takes a huge burden away.

  14. Regardless of all the negativity about Meghan both in the media and on this blog, there is something about her the public adores which is why Marjorie is writing about her along with all the other commenters. If she wasn’t adored, no one would care and no one would write about her however she’s still in the headlines. Everyone that’s in the public eye has a special “it factor” which puts them there.

    • I’m sure some people do adore Meghan, but for many she is a fascinatingly controversial figure who, together with Harry, is an unfolding morality tale for the social media age. I think Marjorie’s comment about Pluto in the 4th is very telling. Do lies in pursuit of control matter? Is this a lesson in hubris? Be careful what you wish for? Are they like TS Eliot’s Hollow Men? (‘Between the idea and the reality, Between the motion and the act, Falls the Shadow). It’s certainly been a public masterclass on how ‘my truth’ can be forensically picked apart and shown up for the subjective experience it is, often interwoven with distortions, lies and half truths.

  15. The US loves a celebrity and is just insane enough to elect her. Though it would feel like the last days of Rome.

  16. I agree with Nicole that she is far too hypersensitive to succeed in US politics, but I can imagine a role for her as a UN Ambassador for something or other in which she can travel the world and ‘be important’ by drawing attention to the plight of xxx while basking in the publicity which she so desperately needs to feel validated. I think when she and Harry go their separate ways he will return to the the UK and try to pick up the pieces and she will leverage her ‘former royalty’ status to remain on the world stage. But my crystal ball seems to be very foggy these days, so in this too, I could be completely wrong.

    • The Queen handed them the Commonwealth effectively so she could have done exactly that – but everything seems to have to be done on her terms.

    • Exactly. MM is way too hyper-sensitive. She will be an activist of sorts not an in-your-face, ball-faced politician

  17. “President Meg Mountbatten-Windsor is being punted as a future prospect if the Duchess of Sussex heads for Washington as she has hinted she’d like.”

    I don’t comprehend what this literally means.
    Is Meghan the Duchess of Sussex?
    Or is someone else the one making hints?
    This one was a bit too breezy for someone who’s not an avid Royal-watcher to know what is going on.

    • Yes she is Duchess of Sussex but could not remain so if she went full political and would revert to the family name of Mountbatten-Windsor

  18. So many people reach for the presidency and flame out, quickly or eventually. Politics in the US is a particulary brutal, soul-destroying experience, not for anyone with a remotely thin skin. (I worked in politics and campaigns for years and did a lot of candidate-recruitment and candidate-discouragement, with heavy doses of reality included.)

    I can see so many other paths for her to make a high-profile positive impact without all the destructive negative experiences of political campaigning, which I doubt she’d enjoy, especially with her sensitivities to negative publicity. Politics is not for the sensitive.

    • “Politics in the US is a particulary brutal, soul-destroying experience, not for anyone with a remotely thin skin.”

      Totally agree, unfortunately. Every shred of actual or imaginable dirt and mug is dug up and thrown in U.S. national elections. Apparently Meghan is not the best at either quietly ignoring critics while reiterating her own best points, or at making intensely outraged and outrageous comebacks. Without either of those skills, “chew ’em up and spit ’em out” seems her likely outcome from the controversy-generating machine of the mass media, and now of social media.

      I have absolutely no idea what party she would be in, or what her stand is about anything other than disagreements with her family and an interest in media business. That’s a huge awareness gap to overcome.

      As someone who sees zero excuse, spiritually, morally or in any other way to claim that magic DNA makes some people especially well suited to be in charge of the rest of us, I would be inclined to vote against anyone associated with any Royal Family anywhere in the world, when it comes to U.S. elections. It would take an extremely compelling and utterly unique platform for me to even consider a vote, that could open a can of worms for a Constitutional crisis. Given that the Constitution explicitly disallows any kind of heredity honours, my country was founded on a war to do without a King, and George Washington made a point to step down. In addition, I really don’t want the current Supreme Court lineup to have an excuse to meddle with either popular or electoral vote. And I’d just as soon not pull a lever for anyone with a tangled history of plausible accusations of being a workplace bully as the boss.

      I could see her being very well received as a leader or figurehead/spokesmodel for a business or a nonprofit of her choice. But not as a politician.

      • I agree with you, Chris. I could see her heading a women’s powerment or other advocacy organization, political enough but outside electoral politics. Having spent years organizing at the grassroots level in politics, I don’t see her having the patience for what it takes to win elections long-term.

  19. I agree Silver the Queen is Harry’s grandmother so it was only right he was there. He couldn’t just turn up if the queen didn’t want him there! The Megan and Harry bashing everywhere is very disturbing. If l was going to meet my new hubby’s family and one turned up with a golliwog brooch l would know l was in for a rough ride

    • Just a point of clarity. Venetian ‘moretto’ jewellery has been around since the sixteenth century and relates to a time when black African merchants trading in Venice and in many other countries around the world were wealthy, respected and very much equals. In more recent times Grace Kelly, Ingrid Bergman and Elizabeth Taylor have all worn moretto pieces from the same jeweller as that worn by Princess Michael of Kent, Gioierelleria Nardi. That said, given the current environment in the US it was ill-advised of PMofK to wear this piece, as evidenced by the social media backlash and comments such as that above.

          • It was Princess Anne who dubbed PMoK “Princess Pushy” (it’s more than obvious the Windsors cannot abide her) and Diana’s nickname for her was “The U-boat commander”. (PMoK is also one of those people who expects to be given valuable items gratis rather than actually pay for them as the common people do.)

        • Yes it certainly has, although Venetian Moretto brooches are quite literally several hundred years of tradition that have nothing whatsoever to do with nineteenth century American-invented ‘golliwogs’. However, PMoK is well known for being one of the less liked minor members of the RF and her lack of judgement in this matter gives an inkling why.

          • To play devil’s advocate, the broach PMoK wore to the Christmas do, was likely one of the 3 wisemen. She’s from middle Europe and Christmas celebrations features the three wise men prominently.

            Bavaria, Austria, Bohemia, it’s a thing.

  20. She had two young children who need her time and attention so it’s not great she has an ambitious time ahead but maybe with that 4th house Pluto she is afraid to be limited to the home sphere .. I have a 4th house Pluto so could understand that.
    I do think it’s a bit much to criticise the Sussexs for attending the Queens Jubilee. She is Harry’s grandmother after all.
    Megan does sound a lot of hard work to be around though

    • I think the criticism was more about setting up photo ops for their Netflix deal, not the visit in itself. That was what was handled well they say. It’s quite unfortunate that family pictures for the memories that normal people would want to take became cloaked in suspicion.

      • Agree with other commentators that Meghan lacks the stamina for US politics/protracted campaigns.
        As Germaine Greer prophetically said, “Meghan will bolt from royal life”. And she did.

  21. Just imagine.. King George III’s 6x Great Grandson, brother of the future King of England, a British Royal Prince in the White House as The First Gentleman of the USA.

    Taking back The Colonies for Britain.
    I can see the campaign ads already 😉

  22. The big question in my mind to this plan is Harry. He absolutely hated the obligation that came with being a Royal. How will he handle being First Husband? Melania really wasn’t that happy about any of it but Trump likely didn’t care. MM I think will have big expectations of being seen as the perfect First Family.

    • “He absolutely hated the obligation that came with being a Royal.”

      Agreed. From the little I know about him, I can’t imagine him saying, “Oh goody hooray! Now I can advocate for some causes to push, through my staff in the White House and deal-making on Capitol Hill! These are going to be my best four years ever!”

    • To be honest, I don’t see Harry’s dislike or disdain for the duties of royalty as some kind of spoiled-child or privileged behavior on his part. His natal chart, to me, has the flavor of someone well-suited to be a monk or a priest, someone who might actually require a lot of solitude or quiet contemplation to be at their best and happiest. As a believer in past lives myself, I can read more than one plausible explanation in his natals for the nature of his past and current incarnations. I do see Harry and Meghan being quite at odds with their individual ambitions, though.

      • Specifically: in earlier Europe, a typical setup was that the first son would rule (or inherit), while the second son would enter the priesthood. I detect an echo of that earlier sociocultural pattern here with William and Harry.

      • I agree – I don’t think his dislike of obligation is necessarily down to being spoiled. As you say, his chart has certain placements (eg Taurus moon, Saturn/Pluto Scorpio, Uranus, Mars & Neptune in Sag) that rail against being told what to do rather than left in peace to enjoy himself. I think Diana (with her Aqua moon opp Leo Uranus) was probably an indulgent mother who allowed him to do what he wanted and this is why he sides with her over the Royal side.

        Since the day their engagement was announced, I thought it notable that MM’s Leo Sun falls square to Harry’s Taurus Moon / Scorpio Saturn. That it might actually become a major point of conflict between them. Nothing like fixed signs to dig in.

      • Harry is purportedly happiest in the game reserves and national parks of Africa. That might fit the need for solitude and quiet contemplation. It was one of the reasons the Queen gave him a prominent role in the Commonwealth.

        Meghan fooled him into thinking she enjoyed the isolation when she clearly didn’t.

    • I actually think Harry loves the Royal status, just not the hard work which goes with it. I think he misses the army for the same reason, as he had status has someone in the forces, as the force serve the Royals. He is always scowling at the rest of the Royal family and has actively partaken in being nasty about the Royals on TV. These actions are not the actions of someone who wanted a quiet life, they are actions of someone who is jealous and wanted more status.

    • « There were no photo ops for later use by Netflix etc. » Except that Meghan managed to stage a photo of herself in a big eye-catching hat shushing four of Princess Anne’s granddaughters at the window as they watched the Trooping the Colour parade. Was all over the news. Hardly surprising that the girls’ fathers both cut Meghan outside the cathedral as they waited together for their transport after the thanksgiving service..
      « Princess Anne not amused over the next 3 years » I bet she isn’t!

      • Also, the couple were supposedly very worried about security and an armoured 4×4 with blacked out windows was sent to pick them up from the airport. Meghan proceeded to wind down the window and wave to pedestrians – one of whom just happened to be an excellent photographer! That was all over the news as well.

  23. Marjorie, I couldn’t believe what you’ve written …are we really in the twilight zone with Herself having a genuine chance to….lead America??? You are so grounded, realistic, on the nail, but…..surely One can’t fool all of the people ANY of the time, let alone ALL of it.

    Her chart ruler is the Moon (I feel she has a Leo ascendant myself and perhaps adjusted it so that astrologers would say kinder things about home life, domesticity etc)…….you can feel the steel….. However, Mars/Jup/Sat/Pluto all natally in hard aspect to the MC (and opposing the home zone) which is in Algol territory!!! Algol is considered between 24-28 Taurus and that’s her MC?
    The pr MC has Uranus and the node transiting it, squaring the angles (MC/AC), looks like a flash in the pan to me….if this DID happen that she was taken seriously she would out-trump Trump. Now I realise we’ve reached a tipping point between reality and sci-fi. This century promises to be a fairer, more democratic and even one (despite the horrors of the present state of the world to reach those goals) but it cannot be that she gets anywhere near politics? Nah……….

    • To be honest I didn’t quite believe it but to fend off a deluge of grievance from her fan club I thought I’d best lean over backwards. What persuaded me she might not be disappearing in a puff of whinge is her 22 harmonic which is strong – and I can’t see her turning into a mega mega film star so something must propel her upwards.

      • Of course, you steer the line down the middle, fairly, but natally the chart is brutal……the public wiping out of her father, who she adored…..but grew out of…..the absurdity of people seeing her as some kind of icon? Mother Theresa she aint, just what has she done to expect such insane elevation? Ambition does not equal talent, or a feeling for the people….she is married to Harry (currently) which should show her how unrealistic it is…..sci-fic….on wheels…….

      • Have been thinking about Marjorie’s note that “One of the great mysteries about dominating people is how big an asymmetry there is between how they experience themselves and how everyone around them does.” People who delude themselves as to their importance are annoying, and Meghan seems to think she’s on a par with the Queen and other world leaders. So many strange behaviors, from the Oprah interview airing jealousy of the blameless Kate, to trashing the RF as racist because they seem not to have treated her right. Here is someone who craves publicity and admiration, yet pushes the press back with lawsuits. Not sure how these dual impulses are shown in a birth chart. Most strange is how the children are made invisible. Every parent wants to show off their babies. Most parents put children’s interests ahead of their own, and would want them to bask in the fun of spending time with cousins. Cannot believe that someone with this blend of shallowness and malice is headed for success.

    • Thank you, Maggy. First we experience Trump’s narcissism and now Meghan’s. Their finances are so shady. There’s rumors she was a yacht girl and knew PA and Epstein.
      They get to keep 95% of profits from Archewell due to Delaware law.
      Chances are she not only bullied staff but also subjected them to emotional cruelty. They’ve rented homes from Russian oligarchs and flew in an oligarchs’s jet. She sickenedly used the Uvalde tragedy for her own PR but never reached out regarding the shooting in Buffalo, NY. I think this astrology means she becomes even more infamous because all of her insidious behaviors will be laid bare.
      As an aside, what does it mean if Saturn is at 24 Taurus as well as having 24 Aquarius at ASC—in terms of Algol? Thank you.

      • Hello Aim,
        Astrology is about numbers really……Saturn at 24 of Taurus is squaring (90 degree separated) from 24 Aquarius…..i.e. a square (challenging aspect). However, if it involves the ascendant, that is the personal point of the physical body – therefore you could assume danger/it is a bad move physically etc – as Algol dishes out (ascendant) pain – hard aspects bring huge effort, but not always resolution – strife/difficulty is involved, could be some kind of threat physically if you were ‘famous’ ….Algol has a bad reputation so contacting the ascendant (most physical description of the chart) would perhaps indicate physical threat/difficulties, etc. A 45 deg angle means STRESS, that’s all, but exactness (ie. same degree in both places)is strong.

  24. I’ve realized to never underestimate a Leo Sun when it comes to leadership in politics.
    Schwarzenegger, Barack, Bill Clinton, Liz Cheney, Mitch Landrieu, Rev. Raphael Warnock. All these people are either former or potential POTUS. Had the ‘The Terminator’ and former Governor of CA been born a U.S citizen, who really thinks he couldn’t have become President?

      • I am not impressed with hereditary positions, so not inclined to be emotionally invested. I am not inclined to be hostile to people I haven’t met. Harry and Meghan are well liked over here. I can’t blame them for spending time away from the UK where they get sniped at. Harry’s mom is by far the most popular person associated with the royals.

        • British tabloids created the myth that Meghan would like to be President of the US. If a tabloid lie is repeated often enough it will take root in some British people’s psyche, I assume. Meghan has stated that she is an activist not a politician. She will use her constitutional right as an American to influence politics for the causes she believes in, powered by her natal first house Leo Sun she is a natural leader.

          The royal family had no other option but to bury the “bullying” claims because the claims were untrue from the start as Meghan’s lawyers stated. The Queen would never have invited Harry & Meghan to celebrate her Jubilee if the claims were true.

          It’s clear that both sides of the
          Windsor clan now have moved on to follow their own interesting paths on the world stage.

          • I’m sure the Queen would have still welcomed her grandson and his family to celebrate with her claims or no claims. She just drew the line at Netflix.

          • Believe me I don’t believe that the bullying claims were untrue. I am no astrologer but a headhunter and interviewed a number of ‘survivors’ of Meghan and Harry’s office and it was to put it politely ‘a very difficult environment’ to work in with very difficult personalities’ Many of the team were upset when it was disbanded as they could have achieved great things and the principals chosen to exercise some patience

        • Everyone will see the Sussexes in a different way. I see them entirely differently to you. She came to the U.K. Prince Charles financed her incredibly expensive wardrobe and walked her down the isle. Yet she repaid him, by eluding to the Royals as Racist on American TV. You may not understand Astrology, yet I have Pluto in the fourth house, just like Meghan and one thing it does, is it hurts people, if they can’t get their own way. I used it once, when I was very young. Meghan Markle, uses it often, to get her way. Pluto is deep and the sign it is in is water. It hides its character well. Yet it is a very powerful little planet. I believe, the more people misuse its power in the wrong way, the more it kicks back. Pluto is Karma in my view.

  25. I’m an American and believe Meghan has very little chance of a high level political position. We are aware of her manipulative nature and grandstanding, as well as her social climbing and narcissistic traits. Maybe she can find support in California but on a major scale she’d be chewed up and spit out – too many questionable incidents in her past and zero political experience or legal education.

  26. “The bullying investigation now hangs like a Sword of Damocles over the Sussexes’ heads. Harry’s shock-horror, no doubt ghost-written, memoirs and further Oprah type grievance-airing may well risk it being published. There may be an attempt at a – ‘we’ll shut up if you shut up’ – deal.”

    Exactly my thoughts – even to the Sword of Damocles ready to fall at any moment. So we can agree on some things!

Leave a Reply to JW Cancel reply

%d bloggers like this: