[ad_1]
Giada Oricchio
Meghan markle me Harry from England they told their truth about the farewell of Royal family in an interview with Oprah Winfrey in CBS who is raising a storm media worse still than the one that Lady Diana woke up in 1995. If the White House applauds the courage of the Dukes of Sussex, the British press is verifying one by one the claims of the former actress. The online Daily Mail wrote: “Although much of the interview was a torrent of emotions, many things can be denials of the facts “.
RACISM – Meghan confessed that there have been worrisome conversations about color of the skin of Archie: “If it had been too dark it would have been a problem.” According to the Daily Mail it is an almost impossible statement to verify also because the couple did not want to make Names effectively casting suspicion on the whole family. Oprah Winfrey revealed that neither did they Elisabetta born there the prince Filippobut no one knows who did it. Buckingham Palace will open an investigation as he did for the allegations bullying moved by Markle staff.
ARQUIES WITHOUT TITLE OF PRINCE OF BIRTH – The Duchess declared: “The first member of color in this family she would not have had the same title as the other grandchildren of the Queen, it was not her right to take it from her ”. But it is a false thing. Archie is not entitled to the title of the prince by birth, could become if Carlo ascended to the throne. Children of William me Kate have the title HRH and they are from princes and princesses and Archie is not, according to a rule that goes back more than 100 years. In 1917, King George V ruled that only the royal lineage in line direct succession could have those Titles.
WITHOUT ARC PROTECTION – Markle said she was suffering because the child was not going to be protected 24/7 since he is not a prince. But it is false: being a prince or princess does not automatically mean being protected by the police and the Daily Mail gives examples of princesses. Beatriz me Eugenia, whose safety it is no longer paid by the taxpayer.
THE MARRIAGE ALREADY CELEBRATED – The Daily Mail believes that it is unlikely that the couple married three days before the ceremony officiated by the Archbishop of Canterbury, as Markle claims because I wedding of the Church of England require at least two witnesses and the public can agree to raise any objection. At that time the couple lived in the land of Kensington Palace, their residence is prohibited and a couple who are already legally married cannot choose to remarry unless there is some doubt about the validity of the previous marriage. Also the reverend David Green, Vicar of St Mary’s, West Malling and Rector of St Michael deny that there were two marriages: “The archbishop must clarify what he did or did not do three days before.” So at most it was one exchange of votes.
NEVER STUDIED HARRY AND WINDSOR – The tabloid begins with Meghan Markle’s statement: “I didn’t research what it meant and I never looked Harry online”, But once the facts are verified, it seems unlikely because it contrasts with the Biography of the couple “Finding Freedom”. Even though I Sussex have always claimed that they were not directly involved in the writing of the book, it is equally true that Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, the two authors, are their friends and have relied on testimonials we will try. The two journalists write that before the first date at Dean Street Townhouse in 2016: “Both participants in thedate in the dark they had done their homework with an exhaustive Google search. And Harry, who discovered Meghan’s profile on social media, told himself interested“. Also in the book it is related that a friend was impressed by the former actress’s desire to meet Harry at all costs and warned her that” she would be the donna plus pursued”.
Kate made MEGHAN cry – The former actress said: “It wasn’t me who did it mourn Kate, my he contrary, Kate is sorry, but I have not forgiven her for having supported the news in her favor. The fact is debatable. Reports of a prenuptial showdown between the duchesses first surfaced in November 2018, some sources claim it was a disagreement in clothing of the Bridesmaids girls, others in socks, others who had fought over Princess Charlotte’s dress during her marriage to Harry. Once Kate and another Meghan were blamed, the episode was never clarified, but a source recalled that Kate was very stressed and excited because she had just given birth to her third child. Luis. Therefore, the event is questionable. Also because Meghan said she was “shocked” but did not report that they were make peace.
HARRY WITHOUT MONEY – William’s brother said, “My family literally cut me off financially and I had to allow myself security by registering with Netflix“This would also be an unfounded accusation. The Daily Mail, in fact, recalls that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex stated that they wanted to leave the royal family to be” financially IndependentBefore cutting ties, 95% of their money came from the income of Prince Charles of the Duchy of Cornwall and 5% from the sovereign grant funded by the taxpayer. And Harry could count oninheritance mother millionaire Lady Diana.
INTERRUPTED FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS – The former actress claimed not to see her sister. Samantha for almost 20 years (“I hardly know her, I grew up as an only child”), but on inspection the statement turns out to be false: a Photography of 2008 show Meghan with Samantha to hers Graduation.
THROUGH THE DOCUMENTS – Meghan Markle has revealed that she had to deliver the passport, the keys and the patent when he joined the “firm” of the Royal Family. Difficult to verify because royals have often been photographed in the guide and so far no one has ever complained about such a restriction. Harry and Meghan received the protection of the police, which means that your trip was meticulously planned.
[ad_2]
