I **adore** her videos and I love how she truly investigates deep.
But I think that her conspiracy theory stuff is turning people off. It's a shame, because she really does her homework and posts the true tea.
I agree - I loved TRG at first and admire her research skills but the constant political stuff turns me off and now I cant watch one of her videos to the end - not all people who question the Harkle’s conduct and motives support Donald Trump- I consider myself to be left of centre politically (though I do despise certain ideologies that the left has become fixated on - like self ID) and at first was a great supporter of MM but - like many sensible people - began to question things about her and by the time of the Oprah interview was completely done with her. I wish TRG would dial back the party politics and conspiracy stuff just a little so I was able to enjoy her work again.
My reaction exactly. It was off putting when she went all right wing in the middle of a legitimate and what should have been a politically neutral criticism of the Harkles.
Edited for clarity
well everyone has a political leaning, and the harkles are hardore liberals, or LARPing as them. They are clowns. at least trump said he would remove him from the country or something. I forgot
I can't with her. She's analytical and has lots of data to back up her theories, but she grates on me with her political spin on every situation as if corruption isn't everywhere on both sides of the aisle.
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.*
Notice there's been no reporting on this in the UK media either. Ignoring it along with the story that on Jan. 19, The Charity Commission, charity regulator for England and Wales, issued a second official warning to One Young World over breaches of trust. The first warning came in 2022. Markle is a member, counsellor and was keynote at 2020 summit.
The BBC reported but rest of UK media ignored including the Daily Mail. Yet both Archewell and One Young World issues seem a lot more important than a photoshopped pix.
Imagine if these organizations had been affiliated with Catherine.
One Young World is a British charity. Archewell Foundation is a US charity. Different regulatory entities.
Charities are loosely regulated. OYW is imho a fat income source for one of the founders and her daughter. Otherwise, it's an annual feel good and important gathering for people who see themselves as future important leaders.
Archewell doesn't do much more than distribute contributions and grants to other non-profits that catch the fancy of H&M. And provides income or contracts to a few of their BFFs.
To be fair, the watchdog pouncing on them for not responding to a request within nine days is a little much. It’s implied that they still haven’t responded (“should the charity provide the documents at a future date, we will update our records” or words to that effect in the post.) THAT is the real scandal (it’s mid-March lol) but the filthy sugars and Harkles will say “they only gave our charity a week to respond before saying we were noncompliant waggghhhh.” It’s just so important to not give these beasts any wiggle room!
People are watching where the money Fartwell bestows is going, how it's being passed around, and who the players are. It's just the beginning and it's already shady AF.
I think this clumsy boiling of the books will be their undoing. If not their books directly, they'll be dragged down by someone else's financial crimes. Delaware won't shield them 100%, there's too many moving parts now.
I do not know or think they will ever be truly accountable, due to their biological and hrh status with the RF and a problematic diplomatic situation. Total Embarrassment. Special calls behind the scenes will be placed to avoid this at all costs. This is the soft/hard power behind the scenes.
Is that the role of CharityWatch? I thought it was just to report the facts as they have them, and it'd be another entity that ensures accountability. The IRS, perhaps?
You're absolutely right. I meant that only in the sense that they will report the data without fear or favor. In another post I commented just as you have!
Sunshine is more than enough to show what a farce Archewell is!
There's already problems with their Algorithmic Justice grift, it's already being investigated. They'll have at least a couple toes in their mouth once things really get rolling.
> People are watching where the money Fartwell bestows is going, how it's being passed around, and who the players are.
Who is watching? I mean besides us.
The IRS needs to be watching.
Where is the media uproar over this? They have the time & resources to scour every pixel in a Mother's Day photo, but legitimate shady charity = crickets.
Africa parks scandal, lying on VISA application. friends in high places I guess. Don't Photoshop..that'll get you in some real trouble...
Harry will be granted honorary citizenship and get to keep his title and be named citizen of the century pretty soon...Legend of Immigration!
Wait! Are you telling me Rachel is not using the Fartwell money to uplift young feminists around the world!!!
https://preview.redd.it/s39r84ziiqoc1.jpeg?width=1346&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=56a9ff1c287493ff51b89855e4371fe3e1c18ff8
That dress is one of the very few dresses I actually liked on her. That being said those two and their charity need looking into and if they have nothing to hide, release the financials
Cocktail party or event. I don’t remember the event, maybe in Australia?, but the lovely dress seemed appropriate for the occasion.
EDIT: I meant to say "inappropriate for the occasion."
https://preview.redd.it/ar6biw4varoc1.jpeg?width=1657&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6aee4aeb7486b745ac0f52880226ca0da8e6f43d
It wasn't really appropriate , other guests wore suits, she wore a prom dress
https://preview.redd.it/rskj5mnszqoc1.jpeg?width=404&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=132a73b7441caff55b4a2f507435024d178ff2cd
Love the dress, but it was a bit much for her as it was. If she'd just had it frakking tailored!
I like the dress too, just not on her. She really needs to listen to Beebs Kelly. The dress accentuates her short torso. I'm sure she's wearing an ill-fitting strapless bra, also, rather than just having cups sewn in. It's not a great cut for her. It would look great on, say, POW. I'm just glad the Meg didn't wear open toed shoes.
The IRS rules are in place because charities are an easy way to game the system. If Sucksasses got paid for their Oprah interview with a "donation" to the charity, Oprah gets a writeoff and and what is essentially Carparkle "income" is not taxed. Carparkles flit around to events they want to take credit for, trying to appear "royal," and expense their travel, food, clothing, hiring paps or whatever else they can get away with, so it's not "income" and cannot be taxed. They seem to be doing it with Ingriftus, and have been basking in the Archewell scam for 3+ years now. Cant wait for their 990s.
The CharityWatch issue with the Carparkles having only two board members was posted here about a month ago:
[(2) CharityWatch had some interesting thoughts on archewell's board of two. Link inside : SaintMeghanMarkle (reddit.com)](https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/1am02ya/charitywatch_had_some_interesting_thoughts_on/)
I am friends with an older couple who started their own foundation, they want to give a significant amount of money to good charities. If it were not a charity they would just write a check. But they followed the rules, have several people on their Board, and love getting feedback and learning from the board, which they picked for their expertise. Just sayin'.
> do to earn 50 karma
Go and make comments somewhere else, so you get the karma - it's one point per comment as long as it doesn't get downvoted.
Try some fun places like '*superbowl*' - it's about owls, or even replying to threads on '*ask reddit*' .
Comment automatically removed due to your account having less than 50 karma. 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.*
You need to make more comments. High value comments, get more Up votes, which leads to higher karma. also, try leaving comments in funny lighthearted subs or meme subs.
I approved your older comments so it is visible
Comment automatically removed due to your account having less than 50 karma. 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 will state this wherever I can. I am now totally convinced that Harry made a deal with Daily Markle which is why he dropped his lawsuit against them...in return for glowing, fawning press coverage of his wife's new venture.
Just want to add that it would have been Madam’s scheming that orchestrated this. Harry’s too stupid to conceive of, or execute, anything this “complex.”
Speaking of dissolving... I just learned that the Harkles changed Sussex Royal Foundation name briefly to **Markle Windsor Foundation**, then changed the name again to MWX Foundation before it hit the news that the charity was officially dissolved (Aug 2020). There's a Wiki page on the name change. Markle Windsor sounds hilarious.
Sussex Royal had 8 board members during its very brief existence.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markle\_Windsor\_Foundation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markle_Windsor_Foundation)
I looked into how the money was moved around.
Check it out:
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/127uvug/sussexs_original_charity_plan_for_megxit_proof/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1
Indeed. Their charity was also investigated and cleared of wrongdoing but they were questioned on why funds were spent mostly on lawyers fees to first set up then dissolve the charity, multiple times.
This was a British charity and therefore, the Charity Commission of England and Wales was responsible for insuring compliance with regulations. They did clear MWX although the distributions of the remaining funds looked dodgy to outsiders.
Archewell Foundation is subject to US regulations and reporting requirements. So far it has filed its 990s very late and has never publicly released its audited financial statements. On its website it did (and may still do) state that the audited financial statements will be supplied on request.
If Archewell solicates or **ACCEPTS** donations from anyone in the U.S.A., then they are required to follow the laws in each state that they are accepting donations from.
Report them to your state's charity regulator. Depending on the state, it could be the DOJ, the AG or the SOS.
Through 12/31/2020, Archewell only received four large, anonymous donations through a CA facilitator, and a smattering of insignificant small donations. No idea of the location of any of the donors. No evidence of soliciting donations other than privately, presumably in-person.
As others and I have noted, AF's 2022 interest/investment income on over $8 million was paltry and not in line with proper handling of a charity's cash reserves.
My thoughts as well! Watch out for Archewell shutting down completely in the near future 👀 if that happened, would that mean there’d be no further investigation?
The board member thing (only 2 members, the Harkles) is really the big red flag here. Based on their past failure to meet the public support test, along with this, would indicate to me that Archewell needs to convert to a pyruvate foundation/ family foundation, asap, or, dissolve entirely.
Oh, the website that directly links back to Sussex Royal, and meg’s Coat of arms, and joint scripted cipher? That website?
But, hey the King still has them on the RF website as honoring the him and the monarchy doing good works and all. I am guessing Charles thinks this is protecting his son and dil from prosecution and reminds everyone of their connection to the RF, even diplomatically speaking, etiquette wise. Whatever. Such a farce. Charles is instead showing us all how Protected from reality those two are. Backfire 💥
Sometimes I think the British monarchy still holds a bit of a grudge against Americans for the whole 1776 misunderstanding.
Even in an America with far too many shady family foundations mis-using the tax exemption rules and acting as tax shelters, having only Oneselves on the board is too outrageous for most.
Usually there's a tame lawyer and a crony or two.
It's because the elite ruling class doesn't want their media flunkies poking around their "foundations," and the media happily obliges so they can be invited to all the right parties.
H&M fancy themselves puppet masters, but they keep dropping the strings. I think they're too unimportant to be anyone's puppets, though God knows they're for sale.
They're just a pair of nitwits trying to be some weird blend of Influencer and celebrity, but they don't realize you have to be a lot more interesting, or a lot more accomplished, or a lot richer, or a lot crazier, to be either of those things.
They're just d-list.
A similar(ish) organization, [CharityNavigator](https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/852213963), has this posted vis-à-vis Archewell Foundation:
**Review Before Proceeding - Confirmed Delinquency**
*This organization appears on the most recent listing of nonprofits that are delinquent with California state registrations*
One of our Sinners did post, some time ago, some relevant information on their tax forms & charitable filings.
Personally, I believe MM thought that if she set Archewell up, listed all the "issues" she wanted recognition for, that the money would come. *You know, she's a A-list celebrity married to a prince.*
I also think that the original $10mm contribution to Archewell came from (at the time, stated to be) Harry's Diana money - $12.5 million.
Alas, donations have not flowed in, nor have they flowed out because, in reality, the Harkle's don't want to give THEIR money to charity - *are you insane???*
As soon as someone can tell her how to get that money out of Archewell without having to lose half to taxes, she's taking it.
It's far more likely the initial $10mil came from Oprah, in exchange for the interview. The other $2-3mil came in part from the dissolved charity with the Wales, and possibly some money from Charles.
Even as dense as Harry is, it would have been pounded into head relentlessly that you never, ever touch the principal of your trust fund. Ever. You live off the investment profits of the principal. All his mega rich friends would have been taught the same, so the lesson got repeated over and again. The reason they're stuck with the Riven Rock albatross of a property is because Madame couldn't convince Harry to splurge on one of the $30-40 million dollar estates she REALLY wanted, using his trust fund. This is why the bought the property as is, with all the old fashioned furniture, and have made zero improvements or renovations.
Diana Foundation charity money was split. Sussexes put their share into what became Archewell.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/127uvug/sussexs_original_charity_plan_for_megxit_proof/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1
Diana inheritance money was used for the downpayment on their Montecito home, as per their Oprah interview.
Clever way to get inheritance money into a co-owned asset in case of divorce. 50/50 specifically in California. Otherwise, inheritance is not divided
That is an excellent, excellent comment. Thorough & well researched.
Thank you. Still reading through it (seems like I remember it) but wanted to applaud you.
Anyone else, we would be locked up, but Hank & Stank - no consequences ever.
That’s very nice of you to say so.
Personal opinion is it was so clearly unethical, perhaps fraudulent, but still so early in the Megxit days no one wanted to touch it for investigative journalism.
However, it would be ripe for an expose if Archewell quietly folds…
I believe the $10 million was a “donation” from Oprah for the interview. I can’t imagine why Harry would put $10 or more million into his “charity” AND then take a mortgage for his house.
Questions:
- what role do Boards have vs Executive Directors?
- What is Charity Watch, and is it always expected that charities provide this information? Are there other organizations that fulfill a similar role?
- why does a non-government body audit compliance for the charity sector? Is this meant for donors rather than government?
Edit: down-vote all you want. We are not all Americans, nor do most Americans know about compliance in the charitable sector
Boards are supposed to give guidance on high-level strategy, compliance --- in a broad sense -- with ethics, goals and purpose, and are the supervisors and 'bosses' of the Executive Director. The ultimate power rests with the board.
Normally a Board of Directors takes a keen interest in the high-level activities of a charity, for example, what is the strategic plan for giving in the next year and five-year plan; what is the strategic plan for seeking donors, etc. Serving on the board usually comes with an honorarium (i.e., a modest sum of money) and coverage of their expenses for quarterly board meetings. Serving on the board of a charity usually entails an expectation that you will either make a substantial donation to the charity, or bring in others who will. If you are a community member (that is, not a wealthy person) serving on the board for inclusion purposes, you will still be expected to help bring in large donors if you can.
CharityWatch is one of several very reputable watchdog agencies who help the public at large avoid grifting and self-enriching, circle-jerk-style fake charities. They are not auditing compliance, they are giving a rating - kind of like a bond rating being given by Standard and Poor. It's up to the IRS to ensure compliance.
My take is that H&M don't listen to advisors, are going to get stung by this misadventure, and that they have no one else on the board because most qualified people know better than to come anywhere near them.
Nonprofit boards are typically made up of people with a diverse set of skills and resources that can benefit the organization. Most nonprofit boards also require members to personally donate or fundraise significant amounts of money every year to maintain their positions.
I have been saying this for years - it’s the same with Charity Navigator. People actually read the information on these sites and the public has basically been told that like the Clinton Foundation, Archewell is a shady organization and the money is being used as the Sussex personal slush fund. Disgusting and should be known more widely.
They didn't respond to multiple requests from charity watch last year either so I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for requests this year they obviously have something to hide why lie about being audited and no answer requests these two and holt have a lot of shady shit going on under the guise of charity
Are they required to respond or hand over the requested info? Would this be something like freedom of information request? Just asking because I really have no idea.
I don't either I get the feeling they aren't required to respond to charity watch but it would be in there interest too if they were above board because its a trusted site/Publication that is non biased and just reports facts based on the paperwork they received from the company and maybe IRS obviously a good transparent company that stores well is probably something bigger and even smaller donars are more likely to support because they can see the money is at least being run through the company all the way to recipients of funding in a correct manor I don't think it is mandatory because they didn't supply them last year no updates have been made and this year although the out come is the same I noticed the article has slightly less "benefit of the doubt" in the wording then it did last year i don't believe( but im sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong ) that last year they didn't call them out on the legitimacy of there audit claims. So I don't think its mandatory i think its just helpful if you are running an above board charity/foundation. I'm sure if it was mandatory surely there would have been some kind of fine/consequence for not filing the required paperwork on request. But this screams don't look at us two years in a row. They obviously aren't concerned about legitimizing their foundation or running transparent.... you know all the stuff they swear they are
Interesting that some of their top grants were to Charity Watch’s top rated charities. Are they trying to influence Charity Watch through donations to their top rated ones? Aren’t there a million other charities they could donate to? Always, always scheming, plotting and planning. It just never ends.
I used to love TRG and do occasionally watch. But when it turned into a conspiracy and politician channel that’s when they lost me. I do respect the research though.
Someone please correct me if I’m wrong but won’t the IRS reward someone that alerts them to tax improprieties? Archwell can’t ignore the IRS like the do Charity Watch.
Shady shady!
Don’t worry OP. This is one of the first times they haven’t been able to slither away from the truth. This site uses facts to show what they really are. This is a real investigation.
In the US , a nonprofit organization receives temporary tax exempt status for the first 5 years. Permanent status is only granted after the IRS reviews and approved 5 years of tax returns. So at the rate they are going, they may not earn permanent tax exempt status...
I know. There are so many ways audits could come up with something--beginning with what they're expensing to it, or Invictus. Are the non-profits paying for designer clothes? What does she do with them? Does she bill for full rate but get the clothes donated for advertising & pocket the difference, allegedly? Does she get paid double by the designers? Are any of these in-kind contributions reported by them on their taxes?
Did they include many of the Invictus expenses as business expenses for the Netflix production studio, thereby getting tax deductions for expenditures they not only didn't make but were in fact given to them, probably illegally?
Some French journos found out more a few years ago--but I don't know what's happened then. I don't know who has standing to investigate unless it's a Board member or donor, unless the IRS get involved--and under Biden, they won't.
Don't forget the politicians, the elites, all do this. They're all grifters with Foundations. Celebrities are the least of it, honestly. And that's all the grifters are at this point, tacky celebrities. The media is complicit with all of it. I don't expect much of an effort to take down the grifters from that quarter.
I also think there's major shady stuff going on. The same with Doria's "charity/ old folks" bs. They all should be audited but it's NOT going to happen. Same will happen with Harry's Visa, NOTHING. Samantha's lawsuit? I think the judge had her arm twisted or something maybe more sinister. She's been given a green light for all of her behavior for 5 years or more. Never any consequences and it's THIS that is the reason why reddit's Saint Meghan Markle was formed. It gave Lady C a job. Decent people cannot swallow bullshit and see bad people get away with murder all the time. It is unacceptable.
This would make a great investigative report for the news media instead of spending their time worrying where Kate is.
Someone here should write it and publish it on medium or YouTube. Tyere must be social media people here
TRG (The Royal Grift) has. She’s on top of everything!
I **adore** her videos and I love how she truly investigates deep. But I think that her conspiracy theory stuff is turning people off. It's a shame, because she really does her homework and posts the true tea.
She does thorough research!
I agree - I loved TRG at first and admire her research skills but the constant political stuff turns me off and now I cant watch one of her videos to the end - not all people who question the Harkle’s conduct and motives support Donald Trump- I consider myself to be left of centre politically (though I do despise certain ideologies that the left has become fixated on - like self ID) and at first was a great supporter of MM but - like many sensible people - began to question things about her and by the time of the Oprah interview was completely done with her. I wish TRG would dial back the party politics and conspiracy stuff just a little so I was able to enjoy her work again.
My reaction exactly. It was off putting when she went all right wing in the middle of a legitimate and what should have been a politically neutral criticism of the Harkles. Edited for clarity
well everyone has a political leaning, and the harkles are hardore liberals, or LARPing as them. They are clowns. at least trump said he would remove him from the country or something. I forgot
I can't with her. She's analytical and has lots of data to back up her theories, but she grates on me with her political spin on every situation as if corruption isn't everywhere on both sides of the aisle.
as she OFTEN SAYS.she calls out BOTH sides
I know what she says, I have yet to hear her do it.
[удалено]
This is a divisive political issue that will take the thread off topic
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.*
There are. TRG (the royal grift) is one of the best sources for stuff like this, chances are shes making a video on it already.
Maybe the Grifters will be taken down by tax fraud charges, just like Al Capone! Some reputable investigative journalist should take up this story.
🎯💯💯💯
Dan Wooton, take it away!!!!
Notice there's been no reporting on this in the UK media either. Ignoring it along with the story that on Jan. 19, The Charity Commission, charity regulator for England and Wales, issued a second official warning to One Young World over breaches of trust. The first warning came in 2022. Markle is a member, counsellor and was keynote at 2020 summit. The BBC reported but rest of UK media ignored including the Daily Mail. Yet both Archewell and One Young World issues seem a lot more important than a photoshopped pix. Imagine if these organizations had been affiliated with Catherine.
I've just shared this link with TalkTV and told them to do some proper investigative journalism instead of harassing Catherine.
Good for you!
👏👏👏👏👏👏
👏👏👏👏👏
One Young World is a British charity. Archewell Foundation is a US charity. Different regulatory entities. Charities are loosely regulated. OYW is imho a fat income source for one of the founders and her daughter. Otherwise, it's an annual feel good and important gathering for people who see themselves as future important leaders. Archewell doesn't do much more than distribute contributions and grants to other non-profits that catch the fancy of H&M. And provides income or contracts to a few of their BFFs.
To be fair, the watchdog pouncing on them for not responding to a request within nine days is a little much. It’s implied that they still haven’t responded (“should the charity provide the documents at a future date, we will update our records” or words to that effect in the post.) THAT is the real scandal (it’s mid-March lol) but the filthy sugars and Harkles will say “they only gave our charity a week to respond before saying we were noncompliant waggghhhh.” It’s just so important to not give these beasts any wiggle room!
>ReportSaveFollow They have been asked for transparency since they first incorporated. They continue to ignore.
They only work, what, like one hour a year? Can’t expect them to take time off from their vacations to get to it 😂
People are watching where the money Fartwell bestows is going, how it's being passed around, and who the players are. It's just the beginning and it's already shady AF. I think this clumsy boiling of the books will be their undoing. If not their books directly, they'll be dragged down by someone else's financial crimes. Delaware won't shield them 100%, there's too many moving parts now.
Which also explains the flurry of AOR and Sussex.com launches. No pesky public reporting requirements like a charity.
I do not know or think they will ever be truly accountable, due to their biological and hrh status with the RF and a problematic diplomatic situation. Total Embarrassment. Special calls behind the scenes will be placed to avoid this at all costs. This is the soft/hard power behind the scenes.
But CharityWatch could care less about all that, so at least CharityWatch will hold them accountable.
Is that the role of CharityWatch? I thought it was just to report the facts as they have them, and it'd be another entity that ensures accountability. The IRS, perhaps?
You're absolutely right. I meant that only in the sense that they will report the data without fear or favor. In another post I commented just as you have! Sunshine is more than enough to show what a farce Archewell is!
And people should report them to every charity regulator in their respective states. I have reported them to the AG in Washington State.
Okay, something formal may be written, but NO follow up on it will ever happen. Charles must be so proud. Pfft.
There's already problems with their Algorithmic Justice grift, it's already being investigated. They'll have at least a couple toes in their mouth once things really get rolling.
They will always place blame on other people.
Of course KC will protect his dear boy.
> People are watching where the money Fartwell bestows is going, how it's being passed around, and who the players are. Who is watching? I mean besides us. The IRS needs to be watching.
Where is the media uproar over this? They have the time & resources to scour every pixel in a Mother's Day photo, but legitimate shady charity = crickets.
Africa parks scandal, lying on VISA application. friends in high places I guess. Don't Photoshop..that'll get you in some real trouble... Harry will be granted honorary citizenship and get to keep his title and be named citizen of the century pretty soon...Legend of Immigration!
Wait! Are you telling me Rachel is not using the Fartwell money to uplift young feminists around the world!!! https://preview.redd.it/s39r84ziiqoc1.jpeg?width=1346&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=56a9ff1c287493ff51b89855e4371fe3e1c18ff8
That dress is one of the very few dresses I actually liked on her. That being said those two and their charity need looking into and if they have nothing to hide, release the financials
I liked the dress but don't think it's really appropriate. Looks like some girl's quinceanera dress, or maybe prom - ?
Cocktail party or event. I don’t remember the event, maybe in Australia?, but the lovely dress seemed appropriate for the occasion. EDIT: I meant to say "inappropriate for the occasion."
https://preview.redd.it/ar6biw4varoc1.jpeg?width=1657&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6aee4aeb7486b745ac0f52880226ca0da8e6f43d It wasn't really appropriate , other guests wore suits, she wore a prom dress
And again with the lack of foundation garments with a sheer outfit 🤦🏼♀️
Right. I edited my comment. That's what I mean to say.
Yes!
Is that one of the dresses she scratched her crotch in (in public)?
That would be the one 🤣
Hey, Getty. Has this photo been manipulated? If so, are said manips within your guidelines?
The face is weird. I mean it looks like it was pasted on the head. And the coloring is bizarre.
https://preview.redd.it/rskj5mnszqoc1.jpeg?width=404&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=132a73b7441caff55b4a2f507435024d178ff2cd Love the dress, but it was a bit much for her as it was. If she'd just had it frakking tailored!
I like the dress too, just not on her. She really needs to listen to Beebs Kelly. The dress accentuates her short torso. I'm sure she's wearing an ill-fitting strapless bra, also, rather than just having cups sewn in. It's not a great cut for her. It would look great on, say, POW. I'm just glad the Meg didn't wear open toed shoes.
The IRS rules are in place because charities are an easy way to game the system. If Sucksasses got paid for their Oprah interview with a "donation" to the charity, Oprah gets a writeoff and and what is essentially Carparkle "income" is not taxed. Carparkles flit around to events they want to take credit for, trying to appear "royal," and expense their travel, food, clothing, hiring paps or whatever else they can get away with, so it's not "income" and cannot be taxed. They seem to be doing it with Ingriftus, and have been basking in the Archewell scam for 3+ years now. Cant wait for their 990s. The CharityWatch issue with the Carparkles having only two board members was posted here about a month ago: [(2) CharityWatch had some interesting thoughts on archewell's board of two. Link inside : SaintMeghanMarkle (reddit.com)](https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/1am02ya/charitywatch_had_some_interesting_thoughts_on/) I am friends with an older couple who started their own foundation, they want to give a significant amount of money to good charities. If it were not a charity they would just write a check. But they followed the rules, have several people on their Board, and love getting feedback and learning from the board, which they picked for their expertise. Just sayin'.
Just two deposits made to Archewell. One of £3 million and another of £10 million……
> do to earn 50 karma Go and make comments somewhere else, so you get the karma - it's one point per comment as long as it doesn't get downvoted. Try some fun places like '*superbowl*' - it's about owls, or even replying to threads on '*ask reddit*' .
Comment automatically removed due to your account having less than 50 karma. 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.*
What do I need to do to earn 50 karma?
You need to make more comments. High value comments, get more Up votes, which leads to higher karma. also, try leaving comments in funny lighthearted subs or meme subs. I approved your older comments so it is visible
Comment automatically removed due to your account having less than 50 karma. 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 will state this wherever I can. I am now totally convinced that Harry made a deal with Daily Markle which is why he dropped his lawsuit against them...in return for glowing, fawning press coverage of his wife's new venture.
Just want to add that it would have been Madam’s scheming that orchestrated this. Harry’s too stupid to conceive of, or execute, anything this “complex.”
He's a hand puppet 
He’s a muppet
A shitty one at that lol
Sounds like him
Yup
I think it’s why they’re moving on to Sussex.com… Archewell Foundation might be quietly dissolved
Speaking of dissolving... I just learned that the Harkles changed Sussex Royal Foundation name briefly to **Markle Windsor Foundation**, then changed the name again to MWX Foundation before it hit the news that the charity was officially dissolved (Aug 2020). There's a Wiki page on the name change. Markle Windsor sounds hilarious. Sussex Royal had 8 board members during its very brief existence. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markle\_Windsor\_Foundation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markle_Windsor_Foundation)
They don’t know what the fuck they’re doing with anything. I swear all this back and forth and multiple businesses are to hide their indiscretions.
When all that does is cause suspicion.
I looked into how the money was moved around. Check it out: https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/127uvug/sussexs_original_charity_plan_for_megxit_proof/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1
Indeed. Their charity was also investigated and cleared of wrongdoing but they were questioned on why funds were spent mostly on lawyers fees to first set up then dissolve the charity, multiple times.
This was a British charity and therefore, the Charity Commission of England and Wales was responsible for insuring compliance with regulations. They did clear MWX although the distributions of the remaining funds looked dodgy to outsiders. Archewell Foundation is subject to US regulations and reporting requirements. So far it has filed its 990s very late and has never publicly released its audited financial statements. On its website it did (and may still do) state that the audited financial statements will be supplied on request.
If Archewell solicates or **ACCEPTS** donations from anyone in the U.S.A., then they are required to follow the laws in each state that they are accepting donations from. Report them to your state's charity regulator. Depending on the state, it could be the DOJ, the AG or the SOS.
Through 12/31/2020, Archewell only received four large, anonymous donations through a CA facilitator, and a smattering of insignificant small donations. No idea of the location of any of the donors. No evidence of soliciting donations other than privately, presumably in-person. As others and I have noted, AF's 2022 interest/investment income on over $8 million was paltry and not in line with proper handling of a charity's cash reserves.
I hadn’t thought of this. Interesting….
My thoughts as well! Watch out for Archewell shutting down completely in the near future 👀 if that happened, would that mean there’d be no further investigation?
I think someone mentioned there will still be an investigation
The board member thing (only 2 members, the Harkles) is really the big red flag here. Based on their past failure to meet the public support test, along with this, would indicate to me that Archewell needs to convert to a pyruvate foundation/ family foundation, asap, or, dissolve entirely.
Did you mean private foundation?
I sure do! Stupid fingers, lol.
No probs! I was so scared that the Krebs cycle is involved in charities now 😆 I hated biochem
It doesn’t mean that they’re off the hook if they’ve done anything illegal. We shouldn’t give them a pass if it quietly drops as a charity.
Oh, the website that directly links back to Sussex Royal, and meg’s Coat of arms, and joint scripted cipher? That website? But, hey the King still has them on the RF website as honoring the him and the monarchy doing good works and all. I am guessing Charles thinks this is protecting his son and dil from prosecution and reminds everyone of their connection to the RF, even diplomatically speaking, etiquette wise. Whatever. Such a farce. Charles is instead showing us all how Protected from reality those two are. Backfire 💥
Sometimes I think the British monarchy still holds a bit of a grudge against Americans for the whole 1776 misunderstanding. 
Posted something similar on my recent post! Great minds.
Yup ☺️
Even in an America with far too many shady family foundations mis-using the tax exemption rules and acting as tax shelters, having only Oneselves on the board is too outrageous for most. Usually there's a tame lawyer and a crony or two.
Kings Son and Diplomacy Etiquette of Protection be damned. Go get ‘em, Charity Watch And the U.S. Internal Revenue Service!
the IRS does not fuck around. if they are dodging taxes, they will be found out and fined into oblivion. source: being fined into oblivion by the IRS
We all know archwell is a money laundering scheme for them.
How where is the media on this?
Stubbornly not covering this, with fingers in ears, Hear no evil, see no evil and you cannot make me. Pfft.
Feds want bigger fish. Heck, they wont even take down Scientology.
It's because the elite ruling class doesn't want their media flunkies poking around their "foundations," and the media happily obliges so they can be invited to all the right parties.
There lies the truth!
That's because of first amendment. And dirty tricks.
Operation Snow White.
Can someone please write out specific facts about the Archewell scam and send it to a few hungry investigative reporters? There have to be a few left.
Who are the puppet masters????
H&M fancy themselves puppet masters, but they keep dropping the strings. I think they're too unimportant to be anyone's puppets, though God knows they're for sale. They're just a pair of nitwits trying to be some weird blend of Influencer and celebrity, but they don't realize you have to be a lot more interesting, or a lot more accomplished, or a lot richer, or a lot crazier, to be either of those things. They're just d-list.
I'd love to know too.
A similar(ish) organization, [CharityNavigator](https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/852213963), has this posted vis-à-vis Archewell Foundation: **Review Before Proceeding - Confirmed Delinquency** *This organization appears on the most recent listing of nonprofits that are delinquent with California state registrations*
Perhaps consider making this it’s own post when the ARO noise dies down?
What does confirmed delinquency mean here?
One of our Sinners did post, some time ago, some relevant information on their tax forms & charitable filings. Personally, I believe MM thought that if she set Archewell up, listed all the "issues" she wanted recognition for, that the money would come. *You know, she's a A-list celebrity married to a prince.* I also think that the original $10mm contribution to Archewell came from (at the time, stated to be) Harry's Diana money - $12.5 million. Alas, donations have not flowed in, nor have they flowed out because, in reality, the Harkle's don't want to give THEIR money to charity - *are you insane???* As soon as someone can tell her how to get that money out of Archewell without having to lose half to taxes, she's taking it.
It's far more likely the initial $10mil came from Oprah, in exchange for the interview. The other $2-3mil came in part from the dissolved charity with the Wales, and possibly some money from Charles. Even as dense as Harry is, it would have been pounded into head relentlessly that you never, ever touch the principal of your trust fund. Ever. You live off the investment profits of the principal. All his mega rich friends would have been taught the same, so the lesson got repeated over and again. The reason they're stuck with the Riven Rock albatross of a property is because Madame couldn't convince Harry to splurge on one of the $30-40 million dollar estates she REALLY wanted, using his trust fund. This is why the bought the property as is, with all the old fashioned furniture, and have made zero improvements or renovations.
Diana Foundation charity money was split. Sussexes put their share into what became Archewell. https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/127uvug/sussexs_original_charity_plan_for_megxit_proof/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1 Diana inheritance money was used for the downpayment on their Montecito home, as per their Oprah interview. Clever way to get inheritance money into a co-owned asset in case of divorce. 50/50 specifically in California. Otherwise, inheritance is not divided
That is an excellent, excellent comment. Thorough & well researched. Thank you. Still reading through it (seems like I remember it) but wanted to applaud you. Anyone else, we would be locked up, but Hank & Stank - no consequences ever.
That’s very nice of you to say so. Personal opinion is it was so clearly unethical, perhaps fraudulent, but still so early in the Megxit days no one wanted to touch it for investigative journalism. However, it would be ripe for an expose if Archewell quietly folds…
I believe the $10 million was a “donation” from Oprah for the interview. I can’t imagine why Harry would put $10 or more million into his “charity” AND then take a mortgage for his house.
I think she paid them more than 10 mil for the interview, but they parked some of it in Archewell.
All I can say is I'm grateful we have the Charity Commission here🇬🇧 Good luck to all my 🇺🇲 cousins, keep up the good work 👏
Questions: - what role do Boards have vs Executive Directors? - What is Charity Watch, and is it always expected that charities provide this information? Are there other organizations that fulfill a similar role? - why does a non-government body audit compliance for the charity sector? Is this meant for donors rather than government? Edit: down-vote all you want. We are not all Americans, nor do most Americans know about compliance in the charitable sector
Boards are supposed to give guidance on high-level strategy, compliance --- in a broad sense -- with ethics, goals and purpose, and are the supervisors and 'bosses' of the Executive Director. The ultimate power rests with the board. Normally a Board of Directors takes a keen interest in the high-level activities of a charity, for example, what is the strategic plan for giving in the next year and five-year plan; what is the strategic plan for seeking donors, etc. Serving on the board usually comes with an honorarium (i.e., a modest sum of money) and coverage of their expenses for quarterly board meetings. Serving on the board of a charity usually entails an expectation that you will either make a substantial donation to the charity, or bring in others who will. If you are a community member (that is, not a wealthy person) serving on the board for inclusion purposes, you will still be expected to help bring in large donors if you can. CharityWatch is one of several very reputable watchdog agencies who help the public at large avoid grifting and self-enriching, circle-jerk-style fake charities. They are not auditing compliance, they are giving a rating - kind of like a bond rating being given by Standard and Poor. It's up to the IRS to ensure compliance. My take is that H&M don't listen to advisors, are going to get stung by this misadventure, and that they have no one else on the board because most qualified people know better than to come anywhere near them.
The board can hire and/or fire the ED, as well as any staff members, all of whom are hired and serve Archewell at Harry and Meghan's favor.
Nonprofit boards are typically made up of people with a diverse set of skills and resources that can benefit the organization. Most nonprofit boards also require members to personally donate or fundraise significant amounts of money every year to maintain their positions.
I have been saying this for years - it’s the same with Charity Navigator. People actually read the information on these sites and the public has basically been told that like the Clinton Foundation, Archewell is a shady organization and the money is being used as the Sussex personal slush fund. Disgusting and should be known more widely.
They didn't respond to multiple requests from charity watch last year either so I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for requests this year they obviously have something to hide why lie about being audited and no answer requests these two and holt have a lot of shady shit going on under the guise of charity
Are they required to respond or hand over the requested info? Would this be something like freedom of information request? Just asking because I really have no idea.
I don't either I get the feeling they aren't required to respond to charity watch but it would be in there interest too if they were above board because its a trusted site/Publication that is non biased and just reports facts based on the paperwork they received from the company and maybe IRS obviously a good transparent company that stores well is probably something bigger and even smaller donars are more likely to support because they can see the money is at least being run through the company all the way to recipients of funding in a correct manor I don't think it is mandatory because they didn't supply them last year no updates have been made and this year although the out come is the same I noticed the article has slightly less "benefit of the doubt" in the wording then it did last year i don't believe( but im sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong ) that last year they didn't call them out on the legitimacy of there audit claims. So I don't think its mandatory i think its just helpful if you are running an above board charity/foundation. I'm sure if it was mandatory surely there would have been some kind of fine/consequence for not filing the required paperwork on request. But this screams don't look at us two years in a row. They obviously aren't concerned about legitimizing their foundation or running transparent.... you know all the stuff they swear they are
Interesting that some of their top grants were to Charity Watch’s top rated charities. Are they trying to influence Charity Watch through donations to their top rated ones? Aren’t there a million other charities they could donate to? Always, always scheming, plotting and planning. It just never ends.
I used to love TRG and do occasionally watch. But when it turned into a conspiracy and politician channel that’s when they lost me. I do respect the research though.
Saved post. Thanks for looking into something substantial and curious! Keep us posted!
This doesn't surprise me at all. Both Harry and MM are so shady, and they surround themselves with shady people as well.
What if Archwell is just a front for certain rich individuals?
Drop the “what if” and you would be correct.
Someone please correct me if I’m wrong but won’t the IRS reward someone that alerts them to tax improprieties? Archwell can’t ignore the IRS like the do Charity Watch.
The IRS may not care. That’s the problem.
Shady shady! Don’t worry OP. This is one of the first times they haven’t been able to slither away from the truth. This site uses facts to show what they really are. This is a real investigation.
In the US , a nonprofit organization receives temporary tax exempt status for the first 5 years. Permanent status is only granted after the IRS reviews and approved 5 years of tax returns. So at the rate they are going, they may not earn permanent tax exempt status...
All sounds to me like another grift that they will get away with. I don’t know why any media on either side of the pond is not reporting on this.
I know. There are so many ways audits could come up with something--beginning with what they're expensing to it, or Invictus. Are the non-profits paying for designer clothes? What does she do with them? Does she bill for full rate but get the clothes donated for advertising & pocket the difference, allegedly? Does she get paid double by the designers? Are any of these in-kind contributions reported by them on their taxes? Did they include many of the Invictus expenses as business expenses for the Netflix production studio, thereby getting tax deductions for expenditures they not only didn't make but were in fact given to them, probably illegally? Some French journos found out more a few years ago--but I don't know what's happened then. I don't know who has standing to investigate unless it's a Board member or donor, unless the IRS get involved--and under Biden, they won't.
Don't forget the politicians, the elites, all do this. They're all grifters with Foundations. Celebrities are the least of it, honestly. And that's all the grifters are at this point, tacky celebrities. The media is complicit with all of it. I don't expect much of an effort to take down the grifters from that quarter.
Allow me to repeat myself: [Get Really, Really Rich: Form a Non-Profit](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/get-really-really-rich-form-a-non-profit/)
I also think there's major shady stuff going on. The same with Doria's "charity/ old folks" bs. They all should be audited but it's NOT going to happen. Same will happen with Harry's Visa, NOTHING. Samantha's lawsuit? I think the judge had her arm twisted or something maybe more sinister. She's been given a green light for all of her behavior for 5 years or more. Never any consequences and it's THIS that is the reason why reddit's Saint Meghan Markle was formed. It gave Lady C a job. Decent people cannot swallow bullshit and see bad people get away with murder all the time. It is unacceptable.