by The Daily Mail Staff
Piers Morgan told Tucker Carlson that 17 claims made by Prince Harry and Meghan Markle in their bombshell Oprah interview have since been proved to be false, exaggerated or are unverifiable.
Morgan, DailyMail.com’s editor-at-large, sat down for his own tell-all with Fox News host Carlson, where he renewed his fierce criticisms of Harry and Meghan and said the duchess is ‘delusional’.
‘Seventeen different claims by the pair of them have now been proven to be either completely untrue, or massively exaggerated, or unprovable,’ he said. ‘I don’t understand why I should have to believe people who are not telling the truth.
‘There are so many ridiculous whoppers in this interview that frankly in the end, saying I believe her would be like saying I believe Pinocchio. Why would I?’
Morgan did not specify what the 17 claims were. However this is a breakdown of the couple’s allegations in the Oprah interview and doubts over them that have since arisen.
Piers Morgan on Monday said he was right not to believe ‘delusional duchess’ Meghan Markle and Prince Harry in their bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey because 17 of their claims have since been proven false, exaggerated or unverifiable
‘Seventeen different claims by the pair of them have now been proven to be either completely untrue, or massively exaggerated, or unprovable,’ Morgan said of the couple’s Oprah interview
Harry and Meghan made at least 17 claims in their Oprah interview which can be categorized as either disproven, exaggerated or unverifiable
DISPROVEN:
Harry and Meghan were actually secretly wed three days before the Windsor ceremony by the Archbishop of Canterbury
Meghan said: ‘You know, three days before our wedding, we got married. No one knows that… We called the Archbishop and we just said, ‘Look, this thing, this spectacle is for the world but we want our union between us.’
Just two weeks after the Oprah interview aired, Harry and Meghan admitted they did not get married three days before the Royal wedding after an official certificate blew their claim apart.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex confessed the ceremony with the Archbishop of Canterbury in Kensington Palace saw them just ‘privately exchange personal vows’.
It came after the General Register Office revealed the couple’s wedding certificate for the first time – which showed they did get married on May 19, 2018 in the lavish, £32million taxpayer-funded ceremony at Windsor Castle after all.
The official who drew up the license said Meghan is ‘obviously confused’ and ‘clearly misinformed’ over the wedding when she made her comments to Oprah.
The Archbishop of Canterbury has also rejected the couple’s claim that they married at a secret ceremony before the Windsor Castle wedding.
He said: ‘The legal wedding was on the Saturday. I signed the wedding certificate, which is a legal document, and I would have committed a serious criminal offence if I signed it knowing it was false.’
Among the disproven claims was Meghan’s story about marrying Harry three days before their official wedding at Windsor Palace in May 2018
Archie has a birthright to be a prince
Meghan said: ‘Idea of the first member of color in this family, not being titled in the same way that other grandchildren would be… It’s not their right to take it away’
Archie did not have a birthright to be a prince, but is set to become one when Charles accedes to the throne.
William and Kate’s children have the HRH title and are styled as prince and princesses – and Archie is not – because of a ruling more than 100 years ago.
In 1917, King George V issued a written order that only royal offspring who are in the direct line of succession could be made a prince and receive HRH titles.
The Letters Patent read: ‘…the grandchildren of the sons of any such sovereign in the direct male line (save only the eldest living son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales) shall have and enjoy in all occasions the style and title enjoyed by the children of dukes of these our realms.’
Under the rules, only Prince William and the Duchess of Cambridge’s eldest son Prince George – as a great-grandson of the monarch down the direct line of succession to the throne – was originally entitled to be a prince.
The Queen stepped in ahead of George’s birth in 2013 to issue a Letters Patent to ensure all George’s siblings – as the children of future monarch William – would have fitting titles, meaning they were extended to Charles and Louis.
Under the George V rules, Archie would be entitled to be an HRH or a prince when his grandfather Charles, the Prince of Wales, accedes to the throne.
Archie wouldn’t get 24/7 security because he wasn’t a prince
Meghan said: ‘In those months when I was pregnant, all around this same time, so we (had) the conversation of he won’t be given security, he’s not going to be given a title.’...
Continue Reading