LONG THREAD: Did #MeghanMarkle Bully Palace Staff?

I'm just a uni student, but I'm also somebody who has some investigation skills. I will help YOU grasp what is happening behind the Palace walls. Prince William's lawyers' might suspend me, but I don't care. Save 📸 & 📽️1/
You might not know this, but the bullying claims against Meghan first came out in 2018. It was reported that Meghan's bullying led staff members to feel frightened around her, and they ended up resigning. These SAME allegations are again at the forefront of the UK news cycle. 2/
Not only am I going to prove in this thread that Meghan Markle has not bullied a SINGLE soul at Buckingham Palace, but I'm also going to EXPOSE the ROYAL behind the plot to defame this woman. Here we go. 3/
Shortly after Harry and Meghan's union in 2018, rumours began to emerge in the press that Meghan was a VERY demanding woman. She would get up at 5:00 AM, run on the treadmill and then, at around 5:30 AM, would begin sending texts out to staff. 4/
Her 'barraging' of early-morning texts to staff was unsavoury to the British appetite. These texts detailed the daily itinerary Meghan expected of her staff, which many interpreted as 'dictatorial and 'demanding'. 5/
Palace staff were so shocked at Meghan's American/Hollywood standards and believed she was incredibly ignorant about speaking in a tone that suits the Royal Family's protocol. 6/
The 'can-do' attitude could not work in her new environment - the standards were more laid at the Palace. Her "formidable work ethic", as one royal expert put it, was reportedly the reason for a flock of resignations in 2019. 7/
Now, I have lived in both the UK and Canada for quite some time. In Canada, it was NORMAL at my university to send 5:30/6:00 AM emails to professors. Like Meghan, it would set my day up after I get back from jogging. 8/
I NEVER expected my contacts to get back to me immediately. I was just doing it for my own checklist, so I'm prepared for the day. I receive automatic 3:00 AM job listings from my UK university!

Meghan's American/Hollywood style of working is how I, too, operate. And YOU? 9/
Before you say, 'Well, maybe she expected them to reply fast'. Not ONE staff member said at the time that Meghan 'expected' a quick response; they only said they were FRUSTRATED at receiving them so early. But one did say she was working too fast on a charity initiative idea. 10/
Evidently, the Palace staff felt no need to meet Meghan halfway, as they immediately ran to the tabloids to sell stories about how 'horrible' it was working for the 'Degree Wife'. That's right. They gave her nicknames, both her and Harry.

Meghan's work ethic was a turn-off. 11/
The Palace staff giggled at the nicknames they had chosen for the pregnant and suicidal Meghan.

And even before their marriage, the staff called Harry 'The Hostage'

The xenophobic & sexist undertones of the Palace staff's interaction with Meghan Markle cannot be overstated. 12/
Meghan must have known about these nicknames, but it was never reported that she did anything about it. The staff continued gossiping about her to the press, knowing she was powerless.

Meghan was never welcomed with open arms. But the British public like to think otherwise. 13/
Meghan's interaction with the palace staff did NOT constitute 'bullying'. Rather, the Palace staff resented her American work ethic & opinionated self.

NOW we NEED to clear the multiple layers of WHY the 'bullying' allegations have reemerged JUST before the Oprah interview. 14/
The SAME 'bullying' allegations said by Palace staff in 2018/2019 remerged before the much anticipated Oprah interview. Jason Knauf, Meghan's former press comm. secretary revealed the bullying allegations against Meghan to 'The Times' 5 days before the Oprah interview. 15/
Knauf was the press comm. secretary for the Cambridges AND Sussexes (2015-2018). He quit his role 1 month after reporting the bullying allegations against Meghan. In March 2019, he began working as an advisor to Prince William. Knauf is now CEO of William's Royal Foundation. 16/
Knauf said he wanted to expose the 'bullying' Palace staff members faced. Getting 'their side of the story' out before the interview was key.

Knauf doesn't want anyone to believe Meghan's experience in the Palace. SHE was the aggressor the whole time, not them. 17/
So here's where it gets creative. Have you noticed anything STRANGE about 'The Times' article regarding Meghan Markle bullying palace staffers? Well, I have. 18/
There are **NO EXAMPLES OF BULLYING** in the article. It kept repeating that 'staff were reduced to tears. Okay, HOW? 19/

3 KEY excerpts from The Times article:
"Staff would on occasion be reduced to tears; one aide, anticipating a confrontation with Meghan, told a colleague: “I can’t stop shaking.” 20/
"Another former employee told The Times they had been personally “humiliated” by her and claimed that two members of staff had been bullied."

"Another aide claimed it felt “more like emotional cruelty and manipulation, which I guess could also be called bullying”. 21/
If you are going to accuse a person of bullying, the very least you could is CITE ONE EXAMPLE of how Meghan bullied you. Or else, it just looks like you're trying to undermine her BEFORE she speaks her truth. 'Reduced to tears' is NOT clear enough. HOW? 22/
The Palace staff said the bullying claims were disregarded when they first filed them. They "insist that behind the scenes they did more to welcome Meghan and help her to find a role than has been publicly acknowledged", per The Times

...like CONSTANTLY briefing against her? 23/
Okay, palace staff. Early morning texts are NOT bullying, annoying maybe, but NOT bullying. But you know what bullying IS? Nicknaming people behind their back, esp. when they're pregnant (and now we know Meghan was also SUICIDAL, for god sake). 24/
Palace staff, you were laughing behind Meghan's back and selling stories about her private life (treadmill in the morning) to the highest bidder (The Sun, The Daily Mail etc.), yet YOU want to claim to be emotionally manipulated and 'couldn't stop shaking'?? 25/
I cannot believe you staffers can call yourselves grown adults. You ordinarily went with the 'big black woman made my cry' trope as a good enough narrative of a bullying claim Jason Knauf, but NOT in my book. 26/
Okay, we have so far figured out that A) Meghan's 'bullying' consists of early-morning emails/texts since staffers haven't provided ANY more evidence over the years, and B) Staffers nicknamed Harry & Meghan during their pregnancy, knowing it would hurt them. 27/
What's next? Well, fairly obviously, this was a hit job by the Palace before the Oprah interview. What's more important to me is on WHOSE instructions was this bullying story released? By the end of this thread, you will learn that it was Prince William. 28/
So, Jason Knauf was the person who told these 'bullying' allegations to The Times. Knauf said Meghan "drove two personal assistants out of the household and was undermining the confidence of a third staff member”. 29/
First, let’s talk about WHO exactly are these two personal assistants? And what HAPPENED while they were working with Meghan? 30/
First PA is Melissa Toubati. She was Meghan’s PA for only 6 months in 2018. She is likely the ‘reduced to tears’ person Knauf is referring to in The Times article. 31/
We know this because, in 2018, the Mirror reported, “Meghan put a lot of demands on her, and it ended up with her in tears.”

Now, let’s get some background on Toubati. We know that Toubati was VERY close with Jason Knauf. 32/
So, Toubati becoming Meghan’s PA was not by pure confidence - she had good connections. The important thing to know is that Meghan’s court documents reveal that Toubati did NOT leave (as per Murdoch press) but was actually DISMISSED due to misconduct. 33/
For legal reasons, we do not know the reason for her leaving. But let's try to figure it out, yes? Toubati previously worked for Robbie Williams as a NANNY. 34/
Toubati NEVER had the qualifications in the first place to become a Senior Royal’s PA, but nevertheless, she was given the job (*cough* Knauf). 35/
You may be thinking: Where's the PROOF Toubati worked as Robbie Williams' nanny and NOT his personal assistant? I have three rationale reasons to prove my case. 36/
ONE: From 2012, Robbie openly talked about wanting an au pair in their family as soon as his firstborn arrives; he mentions wanting people close to him living in his home, including an au pair (11 people total SANS personal assistant) 37/
TWO: Robbie goes on about wanting his au pair ('the helper') to go on tour with his family; SANS personal assistant). 38/
THREE: When the family were looking for their 'au pair', they most likely had a French woman in mind. Why? Because Ayda speaks fluent French and wants her family to speak it too. It's only natural if the au pair was French (Toubati is French, by the way). 39/
If you have faith in my research, one can presume Toubati ‘being reduced to tears’ was not because of bullying, but because she mentally couldn’t HANDLE the work of her newly assigned role. 40/
Realistically, Toubati is only used to playtime and setting up CHILDREN activities (even the background of the B&W pic above looks like a kid's birthday party with balloons). 41/
So, OF COURSE, Toubati is going to feel like Meghan’s itinerary is 'too demanding' - she’s simply unqualified but got into this job via Knauf connection. Her incompetence + Meghan’s experience/work ethic = Toubati in tears. 42/
The ‘misconduct’ in question was likely over her corrupt CV that overinflated her abilities to be a Senior Royal’s PA - this is a piece of information that NO British press is willing to even THINK about - INVESTIGATE HER QUALIFICATIONS, YOU WILL FIND CRONYISM. 43/
Side note: You should know that after being let go by the Sussexes, Toubati quickly found employment working as a NANNY (AGAIN) for the billionaire Richard Livingstone’s family. 44/
And guess WHOSE Richard Livingstone's sister in law? Natalie Livingston, a journalist who's written for the Daily Express, Tatler, The Times, THE MAIL ON SUNDAY (Meghan recently WON her privacy case against the Mail). 45/
Toubati is potentially feeding Natalie anti-Meghan propaganda...which pumps out into mainstream UK media...It sounds like Toubati was offered an even better job if she quits abruptly, makes a crying scene with Meghan, and then gets to comfortably watch over billionaire kids. 46/
At this point, I think it's important to show you that the FIRST person to realise that a set up is happening right under our noses is MEGHAN MARKLE herself. All the media pundits call her paranoid and irrational, BUT I am slowly seeing her vision... 47/
OKAY Second PA, Samantha Cohen. She is mentioned in Knauf's article. After working for the royal family for several years, Cohen quit as Meghan’s private secretary in October 2019. 48/
One source told the Daily Mail: “Sam always made clear that it was like working for a couple of teenagers. They were impossible and pushed her to the limit. She was miserable.”

This ‘source’ implies that Cohen was forced out of her job, as Meghan was too much of a diva. 49/
What the ‘source’ twists is that Cohen’s resignation is SEPERATE from Meghan’s supposed 'bullying'. Cohen ALWAYS planned to be an interim role while Meghan settled into royal life. 50/
Cohen planned to leave her job when Baby Archie arrived but decided to stay on for a while longer before resigning in October 2019; the point is her leaving was known WELL IN ADVANCE. 51/
But the Knauf is trying to conflate Cohen's short employment with Meghan's 'bad behaviour'. Her position was NEVER meant to permanent. It wasn’t a dramatic affair at all, but both he and the British tabloids continue perpetuating this lie. 52/
NOW, we must discuss the third staff member mentioned in The Times article, per Jason Knauf. This woman was allegedly ‘humiliated' and 'undermined' by Meghan. 53/
I racked through all of the female palace staff members that had ever worked for Meghan in 2018 and 2019, and the closest one to fit this description was - THE NANNY. The term ‘humiliated by her’ is spotted in Knauf’s article to The Times AND a 2019 article by the Sun. 54/
In the 2019 Sun article, a palace source says that Meghan taking her time to pick a nanny was “humiliating for the poor nannies”. They felt they were going through “an audition process”. 55/
Now, what the Sun article from 2019 fails to contextualise is that Meghan AND Harry did not want to rush the nanny process because of ‘the incident’ with Baby Archie’s FIRST Nanny. 56/
The couple's wariness of hiring another nanny stems from the traumatising experience of the first child minder.

The first nanny was let go of being Archie’s night nurse during her second shift for ‘unprofessional & irresponsible’ behaviour. We will never know what happened. 57/
I think the first nanny was a contributing factor to why Harry and Meghan were so protective over Archie. But people interpreted Meghan's maternal care as 'controlling'.

My reasoning is this: The first nanny approached The Times, saying she was humiliated by Meghan. 58/
In my honest opinion, this woman feels SCORNED because she was fired by a biracial woman. You may think I’m over exaggerating until you realise that the relationship between staff & royals is all about BLOODLINES, according to Evelyn Pollard, Lady Lloyd, OBE. 59/
Her scorn becomes even more plausible when you consider that Harry and Meghan’s last known nanny was a black woman, which is simply UNPRECEDENTED for the British royal family. 60/
Now, this is only my hypothesis, and you may have a different third staffer in mind - but the keyword ‘humiliated’ is what drew me to the first nanny.

I'm open-minded to any other ideas 😊 61/
Speaking of open-minds..

Polly Dunbar said Meghan rises at 5:00AM. In the same breath, she also says Meg sends 6-7 texts daily. These 2 separate items got merged into Meg, sending 5:30AM texts.

Trust the Daily Fail & the rest of the Murdoch pack to NEVER correct the record

MOVING ON: What The Times article also strangely doesn't mention is that the two bullied staffers that Knauf cited in his account did not file any complaints of their own; NOR were they aware Knauf sent an email to HR discussing their grievances. 63/
Why didn't Knauf tell the staffers he was speaking on THEIR behalf? And what's even weirder is that when the staffers became aware of Knauf's actions, they asked for it to RESCINDED and not become an official complaint. 64/
If you've followed my thread so far, then the REASON the staffers didn't report anything at the time is because there was NOTHING WRONG with Meghan's behaviour in the first place! I've discredited at least TWO of the THREE persons Knauf cites in his Times article... 65/
But if you still DON'T believe my evidence and say, 'maybe the staffers were scared of facing backlash from the Firm if they make a complaint. Knauf is standing up for them.' Then you're in for a rude awakening... 66/
***Quick Reminder! Knauf worked as Prince William's press communication secretary from 2015-2017 before he ALSO began 'working' for the Sussexes in 2018. 67/
Jason Knauf did not bring up these bogus 'bullying' accusations against Meghan Markle because he wanted to help the 'abused staffers'; rather, he was told to release it on Prince William's behalf.

What's your proof?

Jason Knauf, the same person accusing Meghan Markle of bullying, has *coincidently* been involved in a matter of issues that have likely contributed to the decline of Meghan's mental health while living in the UK.

Dr Hilary's take on Meghan's mental state👇🏿 69/
FIRSTLY, before Harry and Meghan were married in 2018, Jason Knauf had a good relationship with Meghan's father, Thomas Markle. Knauf was the person Thomas turned to when it emerged that he staged pre-wedding paparazzi photos. 70/
At the time, Thomas said to his daughter that he didn’t stage those photos, but he later admitted on TV that he LIED to Meghan. Knauf’s role was to basically 'handle' the Thomas situation.

Now, you're probably thinking, 'oh, how noble of Knauf to help Meghan’s dad'. 71/
Knauf may have seemed like a knight, but things ARE NOT LIKE THEY SEEM. To begin, Meghan previously had an agent who arranged European work for her (rem! she was an actress). Unfortunately, the agent started selling stories about Meghan once she got engaged to Harry.

Meghan's friend Jessica Mulroney called the agent to get her to stop what she was doing. Enter, Jason Knauf.

Knauf SPECIFICALLY told news editors that he would STOP any of Meghan's friends from protecting her against the stream of defamatory stories about Meghan, even though friends of Kate frequently intervene to defend her. 74/
Knauf said this, KNOWING Meghan wasn't allowed to defend herself (disabled IG @MeghanMarkle), nor would the Palace put out statements on her behalf to correct the record (but they did for Kate's BOTOX rumours). Meghan was SILENCED. 75/
Knauf gets this behaviour from his BOSS Prince William: The fact that William urged Harry to sign off on a statement that he did NOT bully the Sussexes (W ended up signing for H WITHOUT his consent) but REFUSED to shut down the 'Meghan Made Kate Cry' story... 76/
SECONDLY, Knauf was also involved in the legal case that concerned Meghan's private letter to her father, Thomas Markle.

"HRH Duchess of Sussex vs Associated Newspaper Limited." 77/

When Knauf was still working for the Sussex camp, Meghan, as the newest member of the royal family, sought advice from two senior royals (never named in court). She decided to write her father a private letter to get him to stop talking to the press. 78/
Meghan also shared an electronic draft version of the letter with Jason Knauf, who offered his support.

Because of Kanuf’s involvement, the Mail on Sunday is trying to claim him as 'co-author' of the letter, and thus Meghan does not have sole copyright. 79/
My interpretation of The Mail on Sunday's view:

Someone (Jason Knauf) could have given permission for the private letter to be published by the newsgroup. Why? Because that person 'helped' Meghan write the letter, so has just as much a right to decide how it is distributed. 80/
Now we must ask, did Knauf REALLY send Meghan's private letter for her father to the Mail on Sunday?

Since the copyright claim may not go to trial, we do not know for sure, HOWEVER... 81/
**THIRDLY** Edward Verity, the Editor of The Mail on Sunday, confirmed in a WITNESS statement that a senior member of the royal household (including a press comm. secretary, like Jason Knauf) has been LEAKING private information about Meghan Markle to the press. 82/
Let's PROVE together that Edward Verity's 'palace source' is Jason Knauf.

...And just before we get tucked in, keep THIS receipt at the back of your mind when thinking about how the Palace responds when some members of the royal family are attacked... vs Meghan Markle.

Firstly, we know the source told Verity that there were several draft versions of the letter & other info about Meghan's contacts. 84/
Obviously, this source told Verity all this sensitive info about Meghan in 100% confidence, which leads me to think this source has a solid relationship with the press (i.e. the EDITOR of The Mail on Sunday). No one is going to rat Knauf out. 85/
So I started connecting the dots. WHO does Jason Knauf know well enough in the UK media that whatever sensitive Meghan info he gives out, Knauf KNOWS he will remain anonymous (i.e. 'palace source')?

🔔 DAN WOOTTON 🔔 (NZ Right-wing Journalist). 86/
Did you know that Jason Knauf and Dan Wootton are GOOD SCHOOL MATES? Did you ALSO know that Wootton often had insider scoops from 'palace sources'? Clearly, Knauf and Wootton had an arrangement in place. 87/
While working for the Sussexes, Knauf has been giving Wootton and his contacts private info about Meghan's life. TOGETHER they perpetuated the falsehood of a 'bully-like' woman b/c of their biases against Americanism, blackness & women.

Meghan is not warped; the PALACE is. 88/
Can you imagine the emotional turmoil Meghan was going through? The CONSTANT leaks and character assassination carried out by Knauf on Prince Willam's behalf?

...STILL surprised Meghan was DENIED medical treatment by the Palace? Even a UK journalist knew she was suffering! 89/
And if you STILL don't think Jason Knauf is the palace source, then don't listen to me...

...listen to Dan Wootton HIMSELF, who stupidly admitted on 🇬🇧 LIVE RADIO that most of the anti-Meghan propaganda comes from Buckingham Palace STAFF AND ROYALS (*cough* Prince William). 90/

1) Bullying: Cohen = A LIE; Toubati's CV inflated but got her the PA job
2) Told Mail on Sunday he'd ensure M's friends do not defend her
3) He's 'the palace source' that has been leaking to Wootton & Mail on Sunday; assassinating M's character 91/
Now, you may be thinking, OKAY hun, you have a lot of receipts yada yada, but HOW does the bullying allegations link BACK to Prince William?

I will tell you, but FIRST, I will rationalise William's behaviour towards Meghan - Remember he's the Future KING! 92/
Meghan Markle CANNOT upstage Prince William nor his wife. The competitiveness he feels towards Harry aside, Meghan's destiny was supposed to be a silent ornament that made the BRF look diverse and accepting. 93/
But when Meghan's character was clearly not changing after joining the Firm (i.e. American work ethic & opinionated), William knew she had to be destroyed. He could not let a woman, let alone a biracial woman, take his place in the spotlight.

How did William plan her demise? 94/
William reached out to the media to peddle lies about Meghan. Ofc, his closest aide Knauf already had relations with Wootton & co

Making Meghan appear difficult created the image that SHE was the problem, NOT BP. This was inflamed by not putting out statements on her behalf. 95/
William knew that to destroy Meg's reputation, Knauf needed to stay close to Thomas Markle.

Thomas's sinister tone towards M almost every day on TV made her look unlovable.

Plus, Knauf ensured the Mail on Sunday would have free reign without interference from M's friends. 96/
William is truly a genius.

He has been able to manipulate every facet of the UK media landscape to go against Meghan. He had the newspapers covered via Wootton & Daily Mail (thanks to Knauf), he had TV covered w Thomas Markle/Piers Morgan, AND he had radio covered w Wootton. 97/
Prince William is preparing for kingship. Meghan Markle was in the way. It was at THIS exact moment that her fate would be sealed forever.

Meghan had to go.

Fiji, 2018

MOVING ON: Now let's talk more about the negative coverage William wants surrounding Thomas Markle...like the private letter.

I really hope you don't think Thomas Markle leaked it on his own. 99/
As William has expressed, exploiting Meghan's relationship with her father fulfilled his mission to create a horrible image of her. Her father's public attacks basically justified the UK media's attacks on her. It's a delicate cycle of misinformation. 100/
We need to remember that Thomas Markle and Jason Knauf have been in contact before the wedding even took place in 2018. Like I said previously, Knauf was the person Thomas turned to when the paparazzi photos were exposed to be fake. 101/
There is no reason to think that Knauf & Thomas no longer have a text-friendly relationship, esp. when you consider that their actions have been mirroring each other thus far.

Thomas: @GMB & Mail on Sunday (Priv Letter)
Knauf: Palace Source & Mail on Sunday (Friends/Verity) 102/
When Meghan said, 'I've lost my father' on the Oprah interview, this is when it clicked for me. Thomas is siding with the Palace to damage Meghan's reputation. THIS is why William is so confident in using this estranged relationship to his advantage.

Where's the proof? 103/
I will show you—first..a road map.

A. Knauf privately destroying M's reputation, while Thomas publicly does it; the coordination is beautiful

B. Knauf is 'co-author' of the letter (per the Mail) AND is likely the source that told Verity about the electronic versions /104
C. Knauf already TOLD the Mail on Sunday editor that when it comes to M, it's free reign

D. Knauf, in conjunction with Thomas, sent the final version of the letter out to The Mail; The Mail would NOT publish anything that Knauf does not know about when it concerns Meghan /105

This docu was made AFTER Thomas released the private letter to the Mail On Sunday. He slyly remarks the 'the royals owe me', & THEN Meghan. This order of importance suggests that the royals 'owe' him b/c he coordinated with Knauf to release the letter to the Mail. /106
Thomas Markle did something that benefited the Firm (Prince William) at the expense of Meghan, his own daughter. (The same daughter he says he deserves to be in the life of again). /107
Knauf's betrayal of Meghan is likely the reason why the Royal Family will NOT touch Thomas. He has dirt on them.

If the Royals REALLY wanted to, they would have made sure no news outlets cover him. William is making SURE Thomas hogs the spotlight👇🏿 /108
RECAP: My Thoughts So Far...

Meghan Markle refused to give up her authentic self. It was her audacity to not be used as an exotic prop that made Prince William so furious.

If she was not going to dim her own light, then he had no choice but to do it for her. /109
Palace staff were upset that Meghan's daily texts rattled them into reconfiguring their views on the Crown. Far from being an inorganic institution that's immense privilege was deservedly so, Meghan passionately showed us that privilege must coexist w helping the deprived. /110
We laugh at the staff's laziness, but they earnestly felt 'bullied' by Meghan's unbending determination to conform to no one but herself.

The press leaks about Meghan's routine were partly to get her to change herself. But also to shame her for thinking above her station. /111
The Staff mostly consists of white ppl whose ancestors have served white faces.

Meghan's presence was unbearable enough for the Staff, but then for her to dare direct them was interpreted as a negro, not realising that they are an aberration to the monarchy, not an asset. /112
The racial-gender dynamics entrenched in the 'bullying' allegations by Jason Knauf:

Early start = 'undermining confidence'
6-7 texts = 'emotional cruelty'
Opinionated = 'anticipating confrontation'

Meghan naively believed she had been given a new layer of privilege. /113
With the media's support & the existing racial-gender discrimination ingrained in British society, Prince William was effortless to cast Meghan as a 'bully' during her time in the Palace.

A good example is the 'Meghan Made Kate Cry' story spun by @CamillaTominey.

What upsets me is that Meghan Markle is the VICTIM. The Palace staff bullied HER. They gave her cruel nicknames & leaked her private life

Knauf pretended to support her...but likely was aware of the private letter ending up in the hands of the press

She just wanted to WORK /115
The 'bullying' allegations against Meghan have become sensationalised by the UK press. They are simply doing Prince William's bidding.

BUT at least one journalist in this country has the GUTS to say that William sanctioned the attacks on Meghan.

Listen to the last minute /116
Folks, you are seeing the FULL force of the British monarchy & white supremacy at work. William has transformed the discrimination Meghan faced by Palace staff INTO bullying accusations AGAINST her.

Do you REALISE how warped this is? (P.S. Meghan's team DID deny the claims) /117
FINALLY, on the 'bullying' accusations..it's so telling that UK journalists feel more comfortable saying Meghan's name in the context of HARVEY WEINSTEIN...than Prince Andrew

Again, this narrative has been sanctioned by the Palace. Meghan, even IF found innocent, is guilty /118
'[We have] the old guard's PREJUDICE..'

'To be making demands...that was 'Well, hang on a minute, WHO do you think YOU are?'

Palace staff POURED their heart out about not wanting to serve a biracial. Now, they have us believe THEY were mistreated.

I believe Meghan Markle /119
Jason. Matthew. Knauf.

On March 2, 2021, you brought forward bullying allegations against Meghan Markle. You claim Meghan has bullied you and other staff members in the Palace.

Today, on March 21, 2021, your appalling track record at RBS will finally be exposed.

But before we get to the bad bits, why don't we look at some of your BETTER moments? You worked as a press secretary for both the fifth NZ Labour Gov't and the UK Treasury.

Your work ethic was highly praised.

From your online comments, you appear to be detail orientated. /121
And then Knauf, you moved to the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS). Your time spent at RBS revealed that you are not the man your Boss is portraying you to be.

I will begin w your RBS history and then make my way down to your current employer, and finally, friend Dan Wootton. /122
Jason Knauf began working as the Head of Group Media Relations at RBS in 2010. He worked at RBS for almost 5 years.

Now, together let’s observe what took place while he was working there…hint: RBS Scandal 123/
As Head of Media Relations in 2010, Knauf was in charge of documenting the Annual Meeting Statement between 17/03/2010 and 08/04/2010.

His document contained RBS Chairman Philip Hampton’s review of the 2008 financial crisis and staff bonus plans. 125/
As Head of Media Relations, Knauf would relay key information in this document to media outlets. Then, as Director of Corporate Affairs, he was focused on ensuring the bank's reputation was seen positively at all times.

Knauf was basically a spin doctor for RBS. 126/
As the 'middle man' between RBS and the British public, Knauf proficiently diced & fluffed what and when we knew about their activities.

He helped conceal the bank's dealings for years. Only through leaked files (per The Independent) are we learning about RBS ineptitude. 127/
From Knauf's 2010 Annual Meeting Statement, I will now discern for you two DIFFERENT versions of how RBS treated its clientele during the financial crisis.

One version is what Knauf would be put in charge of relaying to us.

The second is the TRUTH of what happened. 128/

RBS ‘TRUTH’: Knauf writes that the bank is “providing new loans to more than 5,000 businesses each week” and that through their SME Customer Charter, they will remain ‘responsible' when lending extra to businesses and the wider community. 129/
So, Knauf’s role at RBS was to make the impression that small British businesses can borrow from them in good faith and confidence. RBS will support them through the financial crisis. 130/
💥THE TRUTH💥 Knauf was WELL aware of RBS squeezing small businesses DRY for years

RBS customers have accused the bank of constantly changing its borrowing limits. They would base this change on unfairly and unrealistic low valuations of the businesses, per The Independent. 131/
In 2013, Lawrence Tomlinson said that RBS purposefully destroyed viable businesses through this devaluation

As a result, their customers were in breach of the RBS lending thresholds. What did RBS do to the businesses? Give them to the bully Global Restructuring Group (GRG) 132/
GRG forced HIGHER interest rates onto business owners, pressured them to sell ALL their assets to repay the toxic loans, forced them to give up total control of their business and finally put them into administration...

RBS *exploited* people's financial distress. 133/
~16 000 businesses were put into GRG after the financial crisis. RBS believes they were 'responsible' when giving out loans, but in reality, they issued loans by the unit, rising 500% to £65BN b/w 2007-2012.

In 2011, GRG made £1.2BN in profits from this dehumanizing scheme 134/
Small businesses were on the financial brink from no fault of their own. Many thought they could trust RBS with their businesses, but they were kissing goodbye to their life's work unknowingly. RBS sold them off for profit.

Knauf watched over this corruption for ~3 years. 135/

RBS ’TRUTH’: From the 2010 Annual Meeting, Knauf writes that RBS is aware of the public’s concerns about the bank’s pay practices.

So, they created a “Long Term Incentive Plan” that would award 'talented people' that meet the risk management criteria. 136/
What needs to be stressed here is that when RBS customers were delegated to GRG, they were mostly covered by an asset protection scheme. The identifying of ‘potential disposal’ by staff benefitted RBS in their GRG division, per The Times. 138/
In plain terms, staff bonuses were tied to the pillaging of customers assets after their businesses were already thrown away by RBS.

Instead of helping these people via trustworthy loans, RBS not only let them die out but gave BONUSES to the people that MADE them die out. 139/
As the Head of Group Media, Knauf concealed RBS activities. So, in 2012 when Hester says, 'if you deliver results, you should be rewarded'.

He is NOT talking about giving bonuses to talented ppl (Knauf's 2010 docu), but rewards based on BUSTING as many SMEs as possible. 141/
RBS did not truly plan on reforming bank pay practices, and in fact, exploited the practice even further by intentionally ruining viable small businesses. Needless suffering.

Hester and Knauf were LYING to the British public here. 142/
Far from telling Hester that his £963,000 share bonus linked to the 'potential disposal' target was immorally bankrupt, Knauf just made sure RBS reputation stayed afloat.

That's why Knauf's dubbed the spin doctor, per The Express (Sources: The Times & The Guardian) 143/
In fact, it was the British public, NOT Knauf, who understood that what would make Hester ‘look good’ was to be a decent human being and NOT accept the bonus.

Only public pressure made Hester not accept it. RBS reputation was in tatters, and deservingly so. 144/
💥THEME💥 Due to the SYSTEMATIC mistreatment of small business owners by RBS, thousands of people lost EVERYTHING.

Sadly, many suffered from mental AND physical health issues b/c of the callousness displayed by RBS and the harsh behaviour from GRG. 145/
THEME: Since Knauf QUIT RBS before new documents were exposed in 2016, he avoided having to attach his name to statements apologising to RBS customers.

Knauf was complicit in the suffering of Britons but has never taken accountability for his actions
https://www.bellcomp.co.uk/blog/rbss-global-restructuring-group-apologises/ 146/
While it is true people can change over time, I believe that unless you take responsibility for the part you played in human suffering, there is no way your character can evolve.

Knauf just up and quit his role without looking back at the damaged businesses he left behind. 147/
Jason Knauf, I do not believe you for a second when you claim Meghan Markle is a bully.

Small business owners, REAL PEOPLE, needed you to step in and FIGHT for their businesses. They TRUSTED you with their livelihoods, but you turned your back on them for years. 148/
Knauf, you STOOD BY while your bank handed over your customers to GRG, who notoriously BULLIED these people...now they are ailing.

It is only after leaving RBS that you NOW care about 'unacceptable behaviour' towards other humans.

Sir, shouldn't YOU set the example first? 149/
Knauf, you started your job at RBS during the period of the 2010 Anual General Meeting. Perhaps you didn’t want to call out bad behaviour lest you get fired.

But as you climbed up the ladder(2010-2015), you CONFIDENTLY knew about your colleagues harming people's businesses. 150/
Knauf, you talk about ‘upholding principles’ in the Palace.

So, did your customers DESERVE be thrown away after your colleagues destroyed their businesses & took their assets?

Did *YOU* treat them with the SAME respect & care that you claim Meghan Markle has NOT done? 151/
You can follow @nohiraeth.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled: