Site icon The Steeple Times

Narcissistic & Noxious – Markle, Maxwell and Mao

Matthew Steeples
Narcissist Duchess of Sussex Meghan Markle Richard Grannon

In an interview with Shaun Attwood, Richard Grannon makes comparisons between the equally narcissistic Duchess of Sussex, Ghislaine Maxwell and Chairman Mao’s wife

Uploaded to YouTube on Tuesday, a 6:14-minute interview by Shaun Attwood with life coach Richard Grannon is utterly fascinating in the wake of the latest revelations about the dopey Duke of Sussex and his decidedly deviant wife, the former Meghan Markle.

 

Commenting of a woman he brands as suffering from a narcissistic personality disorder, Grannon told Attwood:

 

“With her it’s very, very simple. She was rejected. She’s been rejected and for a narcissist, in the worst way, she’s had the mirror of truth shoved up in her face – which is… ‘You’re pretty,’ but it’s America and there are hundreds of thousands of girls who are pretty, just like you.”

 

“The worst thing is, she was in a position where if she was going to go up, she would have gone up with her role in Suits, but she didn’t. She went down and you’ll see her in various B-list sci-fi movies and secondary roles.”

 

“It would have been extremely painful for her because I think she believes she was destined for stardom. No, she does believe she’s destined for stardom and she’ll do anything to get to where she believes she should be. So, I just think rejection. You can understand everything about her through entitlement and rejection.”

 

“There’s a really creepy parallel here that I recommend people check out… Adam Curtis’ new documentary explores the psychology of Mao’s wife because she was hugely important in the revolution.”

 

“You can trace her rejection from acting and she went back and managed to kill and imprison some of the people who rejected her. So, she got with Mao, didn’t love him, got with him because he was powerful. She was kicked out, not kicked out, of the Chinese film industry, but she was known for being a prima donna and she took her vengeance. So, if you want an insight into Meghan Markle, look at Chairman Mao’s wife.”

 

“I think she’s going to need [Prince Harry] for a while and, he’s powerful still as a token… She still needs him, he’s still royalty. Now if she gets with, again we’re now outside the economy of money, we’re in the economy of prestige… It reminds me of the Jeffrey Epstein thing – a famous film director worth $360 million, he’s not a prince. Harry will always be a prince and what a great flag to tell her friends at the club. She’s still associated to the British royal family and I think for us as Brits, it’s hard for us to understand what we mean to Americans.”

 

“It would take a lot for her to lose him because he is a token. He really is.”

 

“What else could she do? Marry a Prince of Spain? I don’t know what else you compare it to… She’d have to go after William’s wife and she’s done so well and barely puts a foot wrong. She’s done her job by the royal family standards and [Meghan] must hate it, absolutely hate it. The only other option really is William as everyone else is down.”

 

“From where she’s from and what her ambitions are, there’s nothing higher than a British prince.”

 

“As a narcissist, which I believe she is, a true, classic, malignant NPD, it won’t matter how she feels if the drug has worn off, it only matters how other people see it. As long as other people keep telling her it’s cool, that’s the drug. That’s the narcissistic supply.”

 

“She probably is already bored. She was probably already bored within three weeks.”

 

“I’m sure when you get in those creepy castles, they’re old and stinky and musty. They’re not that fancy. The novelty will have worn off very, very rapidly. She would have seen through that whole delusional American, Disney image of what real royalty is straight away.”

 

“Now it’s just what keeps her on Oprah, what keeps her on Conan or any other of the big talk shows, it will be she’s the wife of British royalty and her children are.”

 

“As I was talking, I was thinking maybe if she has the kids, that’s enough, but I don’t know. I think there’s still power, great, great power in that token that Harry represents.”

 

The confusion of the narcissist formerly known as Meghan Markle

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Who did the then Meghan Markle meet first? Prince Harry or Prince Andrew?
In 2019, tedious twerp Tanya Gold got the Duchess of Sussex completely wrong when she wrote in the ‘New York Times’: “Why does Meghan have the press in such paroxysms? Well, she is an interloper: divorced, American, biracial and, apparently, progressive. And she dares not only to inhabit the role of duchess but also to make it her own. Still, her critics – energized by their racism, misogyny and snobbery – can relax. She is not a revolutionary socialist, nor a convincing human rights activist who destroy everything they love. She will not bring down the royal family. In 2019, she is precisely what it needs.” … Oxford educated (but Oxford hating), former alcoholic Tanya ought to stick to other topics – she’s best known, after all, for bigging up the late paedophile Jimmy Savile as a “national treasure” and “enabling Savilisation.”
Exit mobile version