Meghan Markle: Expert discusses ‘political ambitions’

When you subscribe we will use the information you provide to send you these newsletters.Sometimes they’ll include recommendations for other related newsletters or services we offer.Our Privacy Notice explains more about how we use your data, and your rights.You can unsubscribe at any time.

Piers Morgan has written a 7,000 word column opening up on why he quit Good Morning Britain (GMB) earlier this month. The lengthy article is a continuation of his recent criticism of Meghan Markle, where he declared live on TV that he didn’t believe a word she said in her sit-down chat with Oprah Winfrey – something that caused uproar among the public. In the new piece, Mr Morgan expands on why he thinks the royal’s claim her son was denied a title is “complete nonsense”.

Writing in the Mail on Sunday, Mr Morgan wrote: “But far more serious was the sensational implication that Archie was barred from being a Prince because of his skin colour.

“It sounded complete nonsense when she said it, and it is; he’s not a Prince because, technically, the great grandchildren of the monarch are not bestowed with titles ‘Prince’ or ‘Princess’ unless they’re in the direct line to the throne.

“This rule applies regardless of the child’s mother’s ethnicity.

“So, the most serious assertion, one that has already sent racially charged America into a tailspin of outrage, was a falsehood presumably designed to cause maximum harm to the Royals.

“And for all their guff in the interview about supporting the Queen, it’s the Monarch who decides such titles so they were effectively accusing Harry’s grandmother and Britain’s Head of State of being racist.

“This was a disgraceful betrayal.”

During the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s tell-all interview with US chat show host Oprah Winfrey, Meghan claimed their son Archie was denied a royal title by the Palace.

The couple also made allegations of racism against an unnamed member of the Royal Family.

JUST IN: Piers Morgan told either to ‘apologise’ or quit GMB over Meghan row

The Duchess claimed there were concerns over how dark Archie’s skin would be.

She told Oprah: “In those months when I was pregnant, we had in tandem the conversations of him not being given security or a title, and also concerns about how dark his skin might be when he’s born.

“They didn’t want him to be a prince or princess, not knowing what the gender would be, which would be different from protocol, and that he wasn’t going to receive security.”

Mr Morgan isn’t the only one to question the accuracy of the claim Archie was denied a title, with several royal experts pointing out he was not entitled to one anyway.

DON’T MISS:
Queen’s ‘hidden message’ to Harry spotted during recent appearance [DETAILS]
Prince Charles’s stepson heartbroken as girlfriend dies aged 42 [INSIGHT]
Meghan Markle’s donation to UK charity kept secret for months [ANALYSIS]

Royal rules, laid down by King George V in 1917, state only the children and grandchildren of a sovereign have the automatic right to the title HRH and prince or princess.

At the time Archie was born, he was the great-grandchild of a sovereign, not a grandchild.

When Prince Charles ascends the throne Archie would then be entitled to a title.

The Queen stepped in to ensure the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s children, as offspring of a future monarch, would have the titles of prince and princess upon birth.

Responding to this, royal commentator Katie Nicholl said Meghan and Harry would have been well aware of the rules and branded their claims “misleading”.

Speaking on Royalty TV’s The Royal Beat, she said: “Meghan would have known [that this was for an established constitutional reason] and Harry would definitely have known.

“I think it was disingenuous to throw all this together and suggest that Archie wasn’t a prince because of the colour of his skin. I think it was misleading.”

Source: Read Full Article