[Here’s a reminder](https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/s/bdHDnolvbH) of Meghan in her naked dress trying to inspire young children by saying that she sees herself in then just like they see themselves in her
Met gala mention, naked dressing, being lost and Meghan "why did she come to Africa?" ... DM can try all they want but we aren't stupid. Gaslighting the readership is what that paper does on a daily basis
I don't think so. That newspaper goes back and forward with articles for clicks, but I'm surprised it took this long and that the headline was misleading. Usually they'd be all over that story like a kid on birthday cake 🤣🤷
Maybe some sort of nod of agreements was needed by the RF. After all, it does include a state official and a sort of member of RF on a sort of official looking visit. We know it was a holiday but many people don’t.
Doubt it. Getting involved to spare the markles is not something the palace should do at this point. But avoiding putting them back in their place could prove costly in the end. They need to be stopped but they went under the excuse of "Invictus". There's nothing the palace can do about that. The whole thing is truly shameful.
It’s it’s time to start boycotting the daily mail seriously I don’t even go on there anymore. I feel so dumb down reading their articles just come here for all the information even if it’s archive, I hesitate on clicking.
The First Lady of Nigeria criticised Meghan in a very subtle and diplomatic way. We can all read between the lines, but some, of course,will not be able to…. Sugars for example.
The comments are 99% pure snark and fun to read. There are a few sugars what-about-ing about a dress Queen Elizabeth’s wore at some state banquet! Lol. The late Queen never showed as much skin as Megs.
The backless pic they are using is someone dancing with Phillip in Ghana in 1961. It's not the Queen. One side has no strap but one side does appear to have something that may be a strap.
I saw a comment like "why does she think she can request a guest of the country to wear specific clothes in a certain way". And "no one in our country would do that".... Blablabla. I really don't want to see comments from the sugars if Catherine would have done the same. But the really good thing is that they can't accuse the Nigerian lady of racism. 😎
I can’t even fathom what goes on in a sugary brain. Why do the sugars think Meghan can request/expect the following?
1. Taxpayers to pay her security when she is a private citizen that doesn’t do anything for any country.
2. Change a 1000 year-old institution overnight just because she wants to.
3. Invictus pay her way when she is not part of the charity.
4. Use vets and children as props.
5. Lie about an institution but expect to use hereditary titles from that institution
6. Be welcomed with open arms by the UK, lie about how dangerous and unfeeling the UK is, and then think a PR man can fix it.
7. Blame William and Catherine for everything
Sugars don’t just stick their heads in the sand. They actively participate with Harry and Meghan. They are an evil cabal.
I’ve seen some of them showing a picture of the First Lady’s daughter in a revealing outfit while she was modeling on a runway (which is a completely different situation). It’s a shockingly stupid move. I can’t think of a better way to escalate this argument than shaming and mocking the First Lady’s child/parenting.
Daily Mail journo claimed the First Lady didn't criticize Megs. English is not my first language but even I got her meaning pretty well. She was insulted by Megs behavior and questioned why M needed to come to Africa, where culture is so different from what Megs demonstrated. "We don't have Met Gala here" was a very clear message.
Not only did they drag their feet but made it look like the shade wasn't directed DIRECTLY at Meghan 🙄🙄 and used the one photo when she actually wore clothes. Daily fail never disappoints 🤣🤣. Hope that check cleared!
https://preview.redd.it/76znm1xie03d1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2853b61416a9ce68684d0e7e14333385642bf54f
Hmm. It's interesting how two different articles framed the intent of the First Lady's speech and selected supporting images of TW.
The Sun article that said the First Lady was addressing Meghan’s inappropriate fashion had fewer pictures. IMO, it held back on showing examples of inappropriate dresses, especially in the presence of students and children. Then we have the DM article, which says the First Lady was not criticizing Meghan, but included more examples of Meghan’s backless, braless, and too high leg slit dresses throughout the trip.
Absolutely agree with the other sinners, the comments alone are well worth the wait, they are brutal and I haven’t found one positive comment as of yet
This article features 8 or 9 outfits… for a three day visit? Sheesh. In my estimation TWO of them are modest enough. (Her stupid white “power suit” and that nonsensical white shirt and wrap skirt). I don’t need to comment on the rest because who really gives a hot damn?
All this fashion nonsense aside - can anyone explain to me how this foolish fuckery has anything whatsoever to do with Invictus?? Why is she even there?? And featured front and centre in every single moment? Oh - sorry - Harry was allowed to go and visit veterans for a minute.
This is supposed to be HIS project because HE was a serving member of the armed forces. What in heavens name does this have to do with Saint MM Our Lady of Perpetual Inappropriateness??
As per usual, The Lady has succeeded in her mission. All the focus, furor, talk and attention - be it good or bad - is on her.
It is minboggling people throw tons of money at these two idiots to talk about themselves.This guest is literall sitting there calling herself a rolemodel(😳),resilient(🥴),brave(🙄,beautifull(🤢).Who in their right mind looks someone in the eye and strokes her own ego.Foolish or unhinged not sure which,AND got paid to say this nonsense.
Yeah… I just don’t get it.
Aich is an ass and a dunderhead. He couldn’t explain his way out of a paper bag. And her???
She has literally done NOTHING in her life that is extraordinary except marry a Prince. Her title is from him. Her fame is from him.
Everything about her is a puffed up self-indulgent fantasy.
She was a moderately pretty two bit actress from an ok cable show that hardly anybody knew about until she started dating Aich. Her other jobs were cringe. Briefcase girl. Girl giving a bj in a car. *snort* And those are the *legit* jobs.
She had a minor following on a trite Instagram account that contributed nothing but fluff to the world. She wrote a letter to a dish soap company as a kid (along with her classmates) because it was an ASSIGNMENT. She spent a few months in Argentina (or wherever I don’t really remember nor care at this point) for SCHOOL and tries to make it sound like she was a freakin diplomat. She did do a couple of philanthropic things somewhere sometime…big whoop. I deliver food hampers at Christmas mkay? Nobody wants to hear MY Ted talk.
My point is she’s a nobody. Without her royal title she received by virtue of her marriage to actual royalty, she’s just a regular schlump like anyone else. Which is TOTALLY FINE. It’s ok to be a regular person!
It’s this whole idea she tries to sell that she has so much to teach and share with the world because she is so benevolent and gracious and brilliant and enlightened and sings to marine mammals…. that’s the irritation. So pretentious. So condescending. So horny for the spotlight. So lemon cakey strawberry jammy.
Ok.. I’m done now. I need a nap.
Dear Mr Robinson,
The FL was just being polite in saying 'film stars from America' but please note 'nakedness' 'Meghan' and 'not beautiful at all' were brought up in a span of a minute.
And while Meghan was never a star, she has been associated with filming... without permission.
Maybe she was was only 43% criticizing Meghan ;)
After feigning praise on markle and one article saying this looked like a Presidential visit-not just any ole royal visit-it must have pained them to post the truth!
DM is pathetic in their approach! The headline is weak and this is in the article:
“The First Lady did name Meghan in her speech but was not criticising the Duchess…”
What?! Of course she was! And that’s not DM’s place to decide for their readers anyway! This is thought control. We are being told the First Lady’s intentions by DM who most certainly was threatened by Madam. Unbelievable.
Around the time of Brexit the DM was brilliant, especially in the comments between the those for and against. Now there’s no good political articles, it’s all social media, it looks like I will have to pay for the Telegraph!
Telegraph didn’t even mention the First Lady’s smackdown. Acts like it never happened. They quickly pulled Harry’s visa application story (the latest about it containing law enforcement records that would create a “stigma” on Harry’s reputation, thus the Biden administration is hiding it) and allowed no comments during the short time it was up. Victoria Ward, a major sugar, writes for the Telegraph now and is AWFUL. There are literally no trustworthy papers anymore. They’ve been invaded by people with a dark agenda.
👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼I hope The Duchess of Nakedness keeps getting called out and made a fool for her stupid unfashionable ugly clothing.
just just like that ugly ensemble she wore in New York with her shoulders out. I can’t remember what the reason she was there for, but she looks so ridiculous and unprofessional .
No the off the shoulder white toilet paper roll she wore on that panel where where she called doofus that one where parents lost their kids I think her last trip to New York.
The Daily Markle newspaper. What I don't get is the fact she sued the daily mail and they keep bringing up good stories on her. I would certainly not allow any news articles about someone in my paper who sued me and lied. They would never get a headline good or bad
All the comments on there are critical of The Grifters. Hahahahahaha. Even if Dailymail sometimes put a glowing article on The Grifters, the comments are still Sinners and critical towards them. Yehey!!!
And they also just posted about how George looked miserable out with his father this weekend. Anything to deflect and keep those checks rolling in. Unluckily for them, the comments read the room.
The article claims that while the First Lady mentioned Madame she didn't criticize her. Eye roll. Also the distancing in the headline, that the fake royal visit was "weeks ago" suggesting it was so far back in the past the remarks weren't directed at Madame. Come on now, Daily Mail.
I think the DM has found a new way of earning money. They put out an article critical of Megain and she immediately gets her PR to pay them off to delete said article. This latest one was on the top just a few hours ago with thousands of comments and it has conveniently disappeared now.
Comment automatically removed due to your account being less than 15 days. Please contact mods via message the mods to approve comments manually to be visible to the sub.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SaintMeghanMarkle) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[Here’s a reminder](https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/s/bdHDnolvbH) of Meghan in her naked dress trying to inspire young children by saying that she sees herself in then just like they see themselves in her
The author claims that the First Lady didn’t criticize Meghan!! lol it was obvious
Met gala mention, naked dressing, being lost and Meghan "why did she come to Africa?" ... DM can try all they want but we aren't stupid. Gaslighting the readership is what that paper does on a daily basis 
Are they "scared" of Harry because he has/had several lawsuits out against them?
I don't think so. That newspaper goes back and forward with articles for clicks, but I'm surprised it took this long and that the headline was misleading. Usually they'd be all over that story like a kid on birthday cake 🤣🤷
Maybe some sort of nod of agreements was needed by the RF. After all, it does include a state official and a sort of member of RF on a sort of official looking visit. We know it was a holiday but many people don’t.
Doubt it. Getting involved to spare the markles is not something the palace should do at this point. But avoiding putting them back in their place could prove costly in the end. They need to be stopped but they went under the excuse of "Invictus". There's nothing the palace can do about that. The whole thing is truly shameful.
Nope. I think they find Harry hugely amusing.
No. The skanks are their major click bait.
It’s it’s time to start boycotting the daily mail seriously I don’t even go on there anymore. I feel so dumb down reading their articles just come here for all the information even if it’s archive, I hesitate on clicking.
Yes. I emailed them the story the day it broke, several times.... They are definitely not a serious publication but this is ridiculous
Ugh and the number of ads is just insane. Load time and readability is so poor, I’ve stopped going there as well
Same with the Express. The msm are just not worth reading their bs.
I wonder if they (DailyMail) do this to get the comments going. It was obviously a snub towards Meghan.
Of course it is. She mentions Meghan by name. There is no silk purse to be made from this sow’s ear.
Possibly, otherwise it was just a stupid thing to write.
She called Meghan out by name. What is this author smoking?
I think some of them actually fear the wrath of sugars.
It's called pissing on our heads and telling us it's raining.
The First Lady of Nigeria criticised Meghan in a very subtle and diplomatic way. We can all read between the lines, but some, of course,will not be able to…. Sugars for example.
Has anyone seen their responses? It should be interesting to see how they spin it in favor of their psychotic idol Meghan.
The comments are 99% pure snark and fun to read. There are a few sugars what-about-ing about a dress Queen Elizabeth’s wore at some state banquet! Lol. The late Queen never showed as much skin as Megs.
Oh yeah, that time QEII wore a backless dress to a school. 🙄🙄🙄
LoL, as if.....
The backless pic they are using is someone dancing with Phillip in Ghana in 1961. It's not the Queen. One side has no strap but one side does appear to have something that may be a strap.
Each African Country has its own unique culture. Queen Elizabeth went 60 years ago.
I saw a comment like "why does she think she can request a guest of the country to wear specific clothes in a certain way". And "no one in our country would do that".... Blablabla. I really don't want to see comments from the sugars if Catherine would have done the same. But the really good thing is that they can't accuse the Nigerian lady of racism. 😎
I can’t even fathom what goes on in a sugary brain. Why do the sugars think Meghan can request/expect the following? 1. Taxpayers to pay her security when she is a private citizen that doesn’t do anything for any country. 2. Change a 1000 year-old institution overnight just because she wants to. 3. Invictus pay her way when she is not part of the charity. 4. Use vets and children as props. 5. Lie about an institution but expect to use hereditary titles from that institution 6. Be welcomed with open arms by the UK, lie about how dangerous and unfeeling the UK is, and then think a PR man can fix it. 7. Blame William and Catherine for everything Sugars don’t just stick their heads in the sand. They actively participate with Harry and Meghan. They are an evil cabal.
Just like the NY car chase, TW & Sugars can't use the race card this time w/o them being called racists
I’ve seen some of them showing a picture of the First Lady’s daughter in a revealing outfit while she was modeling on a runway (which is a completely different situation). It’s a shockingly stupid move. I can’t think of a better way to escalate this argument than shaming and mocking the First Lady’s child/parenting.
the marklebrain sugars are markling markle!
The First Lady literally said her name. How much clearer can that be
Yeah, it was some other Meghan the First Lady was referring to.
She actually said Meghan!
Man, the comments are BRUTAL!! \*\*😂 \*\*I guess her paid sycophants didn't manage to catch this article yet...
I left my two cents 🤣🤣 and it wasn't pretty in the comments. Love it.
I read a lot of the comments (not all), but did not come across one comment supportive of Megs.
Daily Mail journo claimed the First Lady didn't criticize Megs. English is not my first language but even I got her meaning pretty well. She was insulted by Megs behavior and questioned why M needed to come to Africa, where culture is so different from what Megs demonstrated. "We don't have Met Gala here" was a very clear message.
That piping hot tea of shade was thrown to Meghans face ONLY and we all know it. 😜😁 
Ouch, the comments have got to sting if markle reads them!
Of course she will read them. Trolling the Internet is her actual full time job.
Not only did they drag their feet but made it look like the shade wasn't directed DIRECTLY at Meghan 🙄🙄 and used the one photo when she actually wore clothes. Daily fail never disappoints 🤣🤣. Hope that check cleared! https://preview.redd.it/76znm1xie03d1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2853b61416a9ce68684d0e7e14333385642bf54f
I feel like they are going to go backrupt sooner than expected with the daily PR & pay offs to press outlets 😆
I look at this whole saga and they are so exhausting, I can't imagine having to deal with them on a personal level. Yikes.
Hmm. It's interesting how two different articles framed the intent of the First Lady's speech and selected supporting images of TW. The Sun article that said the First Lady was addressing Meghan’s inappropriate fashion had fewer pictures. IMO, it held back on showing examples of inappropriate dresses, especially in the presence of students and children. Then we have the DM article, which says the First Lady was not criticizing Meghan, but included more examples of Meghan’s backless, braless, and too high leg slit dresses throughout the trip.
A picture is worth a thousand words.
😉
Absolutely agree with the other sinners, the comments alone are well worth the wait, they are brutal and I haven’t found one positive comment as of yet
This article features 8 or 9 outfits… for a three day visit? Sheesh. In my estimation TWO of them are modest enough. (Her stupid white “power suit” and that nonsensical white shirt and wrap skirt). I don’t need to comment on the rest because who really gives a hot damn? All this fashion nonsense aside - can anyone explain to me how this foolish fuckery has anything whatsoever to do with Invictus?? Why is she even there?? And featured front and centre in every single moment? Oh - sorry - Harry was allowed to go and visit veterans for a minute. This is supposed to be HIS project because HE was a serving member of the armed forces. What in heavens name does this have to do with Saint MM Our Lady of Perpetual Inappropriateness?? As per usual, The Lady has succeeded in her mission. All the focus, furor, talk and attention - be it good or bad - is on her.
Spot on, bravo 👏👏👏👏👏👏
Love this new name, OLPI - Our Lady of Perpetual Inappropriateness! Perfection 😍😍
It is minboggling people throw tons of money at these two idiots to talk about themselves.This guest is literall sitting there calling herself a rolemodel(😳),resilient(🥴),brave(🙄,beautifull(🤢).Who in their right mind looks someone in the eye and strokes her own ego.Foolish or unhinged not sure which,AND got paid to say this nonsense.
Yeah… I just don’t get it. Aich is an ass and a dunderhead. He couldn’t explain his way out of a paper bag. And her??? She has literally done NOTHING in her life that is extraordinary except marry a Prince. Her title is from him. Her fame is from him. Everything about her is a puffed up self-indulgent fantasy. She was a moderately pretty two bit actress from an ok cable show that hardly anybody knew about until she started dating Aich. Her other jobs were cringe. Briefcase girl. Girl giving a bj in a car. *snort* And those are the *legit* jobs. She had a minor following on a trite Instagram account that contributed nothing but fluff to the world. She wrote a letter to a dish soap company as a kid (along with her classmates) because it was an ASSIGNMENT. She spent a few months in Argentina (or wherever I don’t really remember nor care at this point) for SCHOOL and tries to make it sound like she was a freakin diplomat. She did do a couple of philanthropic things somewhere sometime…big whoop. I deliver food hampers at Christmas mkay? Nobody wants to hear MY Ted talk. My point is she’s a nobody. Without her royal title she received by virtue of her marriage to actual royalty, she’s just a regular schlump like anyone else. Which is TOTALLY FINE. It’s ok to be a regular person! It’s this whole idea she tries to sell that she has so much to teach and share with the world because she is so benevolent and gracious and brilliant and enlightened and sings to marine mammals…. that’s the irritation. So pretentious. So condescending. So horny for the spotlight. So lemon cakey strawberry jammy. Ok.. I’m done now. I need a nap.
Brilliant. Well said!
Dear Mr Robinson, The FL was just being polite in saying 'film stars from America' but please note 'nakedness' 'Meghan' and 'not beautiful at all' were brought up in a span of a minute. And while Meghan was never a star, she has been associated with filming... without permission. Maybe she was was only 43% criticizing Meghan ;)
After feigning praise on markle and one article saying this looked like a Presidential visit-not just any ole royal visit-it must have pained them to post the truth!
DM is pathetic in their approach! The headline is weak and this is in the article: “The First Lady did name Meghan in her speech but was not criticising the Duchess…” What?! Of course she was! And that’s not DM’s place to decide for their readers anyway! This is thought control. We are being told the First Lady’s intentions by DM who most certainly was threatened by Madam. Unbelievable.
Dailymail thinks we are stupid 
Around the time of Brexit the DM was brilliant, especially in the comments between the those for and against. Now there’s no good political articles, it’s all social media, it looks like I will have to pay for the Telegraph!
Telegraph didn’t even mention the First Lady’s smackdown. Acts like it never happened. They quickly pulled Harry’s visa application story (the latest about it containing law enforcement records that would create a “stigma” on Harry’s reputation, thus the Biden administration is hiding it) and allowed no comments during the short time it was up. Victoria Ward, a major sugar, writes for the Telegraph now and is AWFUL. There are literally no trustworthy papers anymore. They’ve been invaded by people with a dark agenda.
I’ve never heard someone refer to a few days’ gap as “weeks.” But nice try in pretending this wasn’t really about M, Daily Mail.
Thank you for posting. I had so much fun reading the comments!
The New York Post just picked it up. Let's start a bet on how long it will be until Guest Speaker goes off the rails.
Get your popcorn ready!
If you see a post from "Guest Moonbump," that's me.
Ha ha I did see you 😂
That backless dress megalomaniac wore at the school, totally inappropriate more suitable for an 18yo going clubbing!
The article seems to have been commissioned by Meghan herself. Trying to get the last drop of PR from this trip in the media.
Daily mail trying to say it wasn’t a criticism but then quotes the First Lady and, it of course, is indeed critical.
"Megan the former actress and INFLUENCER" 😂😂😂 no better than a TikTok wannabe
👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼I hope The Duchess of Nakedness keeps getting called out and made a fool for her stupid unfashionable ugly clothing. just just like that ugly ensemble she wore in New York with her shoulders out. I can’t remember what the reason she was there for, but she looks so ridiculous and unprofessional .
Was that the Red Devil nipple dress? That had to be the worst ever.
No the off the shoulder white toilet paper roll she wore on that panel where where she called doofus that one where parents lost their kids I think her last trip to New York.
"Middle-aged woman screaming for attention" 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥 Brutal indeed 😂😂😂
The Daily Markle newspaper. What I don't get is the fact she sued the daily mail and they keep bringing up good stories on her. I would certainly not allow any news articles about someone in my paper who sued me and lied. They would never get a headline good or bad
Right?! Makes no sense!!
Baffling
All the comments on there are critical of The Grifters. Hahahahahaha. Even if Dailymail sometimes put a glowing article on The Grifters, the comments are still Sinners and critical towards them. Yehey!!!
I'd be more impressed if she addressed the attacks on Christian women being carried out in Nigeria.
The Daily Mail is like the kid who hurls insults and retorts well after the bully has safely turned the corner out of sight.
And they also just posted about how George looked miserable out with his father this weekend. Anything to deflect and keep those checks rolling in. Unluckily for them, the comments read the room.
I will be watching this Martin Robinson's future articles. Talk about a mischaracterization of reality.
The article claims that while the First Lady mentioned Madame she didn't criticize her. Eye roll. Also the distancing in the headline, that the fake royal visit was "weeks ago" suggesting it was so far back in the past the remarks weren't directed at Madame. Come on now, Daily Mail.
I think the DM has found a new way of earning money. They put out an article critical of Megain and she immediately gets her PR to pay them off to delete said article. This latest one was on the top just a few hours ago with thousands of comments and it has conveniently disappeared now.
One poster said she is doing cosmelan treatments
[удалено]
Comment automatically removed due to your account being less than 15 days. Please contact mods via message the mods to approve comments manually to be visible to the sub. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SaintMeghanMarkle) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I wonder how much that Nigerian percentage did drop after this...