So, Prince William had one or two suppers with Rose Hanbury, huh?

Can I just suggest something to all of the royal-watching peeps out there? When there’s a particularly juicy angle on a story, feel free to tweet at me here at @KaiseratCB. You Celebitches sent me the link to the Sun story about Rose Hanbury’s marriage, but I didn’t see the whole “the Sun changed their online story after publication” angle until I had already finished writing it up and had already published it. So that’s my explanation – I really didn’t know. The Sun, the Daily Mail and other outlets will sometimes change, update or mysteriously edit their articles after publication – that’s nothing new and we do it here too, everything is always changing in the gossip world. But this story felt like something else happened.

The Sun’s story on Rose Hanbury read as some kind of bizarre coded message about how Rose’s life kind of sucks now because the Duchess of Cambridge successfully phased her out of their Norfolk “Turnip Toff” society, and maybe Rose’s husband is gay or bisexual and he’s never at home, he’s too busy partying in Paris with his dude friends. But this was edited out of the original online-published story:

Now Rose Hanbury's brother is being asked questions about her relationship with Prince William. Rose and William enjoyed some suppers together, while Kate was not there. Come on Sun, stop beating around the bush and report the full story. #PrinceWilliamAffair #FreeSpeech pic.twitter.com/xSRdF430dh

— Emma-Wickes (@WickesEmma) June 13, 2019

The edited version I read Friday morning was missing the last two paragraph/quotes:

“It seems to have started because she had one or two suppers with William in Norfolk when Kate was away.”

“But it was hardly as if they were meeting behind Kate’s back – of course she knew they were getting together. And Kate was grateful that a good friend and neighbour like Rose was there to entertain William.”

I mean… doesn’t it actually make it MORE of a thing that these two quotes were included in the original story and then later edited out? And again, who is this coming from? The whole piece is rather bizarre if it’s from Team Rose trying to make her seem sympathetic. It’s also bizarre if it’s coming from Team Cambridge as an attempt to dunk on Rose.

As for these quotes… if you take them at face value, I actually sort of believe them. As in, I believe that Kate “knew” that William was cheating on her, and maybe even knew that Rose was the other woman. But as I keep saying: Kate has ALWAYS turned a blind eye to William’s infidelities. I know that comes as huge news to people who thought Kate and William were the most perfect and keen couple ever, but throughout Kate’s Waity Decade, William was always running off with other women and Kate just accepted it. That’s what I keep getting stuck on: if Kate was so used to William’s infidelities, why did Kate make the move to phase out Rose so suddenly? Is it because Rose wasn’t just some meaningless one-nighter? That’s what I’m starting to wonder: if all of this happened because William and Rose actually had feelings for each other and the Cambridges’ marriage really was “under threat,” or at least Kate thought it was.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

ncG1vNJzZmivp6x7pLHLnpmirJOdxm%2BvzqZmb2pkboJ5e9KolqmqmaOwpqvWoqOloZGirKmtw5imp52PpL%2BgwNaolqytoKWys7%2B%2BsKCtoI%2BnvLSxvqGYp5qlp8agtNShZg%3D%3D