Blaming King Charles: The Fallout of Megxit Saga

Author Omid Scobie has pointed fingers at King Charles, alleging that financial pressures pushed Meghan and Harry into signing lucrative deals.

Scobie suggested that the royal couple's decision to enter into commercial agreements was a result of the king's mishandling of the Megxit saga.

According to him, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex found themselves in a precarious position, compelled to accept deals they may have otherwise declined if their financial support had not been severed.

Initially, the king did provide financial assistance to the couple during their first year.

However, as the saga unfolded, the need for substantial funds became apparent.

The couple had to cover expenses such as housing and security, which prompted them to delve into commercial ventures.

This led to the signing of contracts for books, documentaries, and podcasts, including multi-million dollar deals with Netflix and Spotify.

The aftermath of their decision to step back as senior royals and relocate to the U.S. was marked by revelations that strained their relationships within the royal family.

Prince Harry's public statements in various platforms shed light on his strained ties with his father and brother, Prince William.

Scobie implied that the Sussexes' disruptive actions were a consequence of the king's handling of their departure from royal duties.

Critics have labeled Meghan and Harry as greedy and unreasonable, questioning their complaints about financial support and privileges.

While other royals have gracefully accepted changes in their titles and benefits, the Sussexes have been vocal about their grievances.

Scobie's book, “Endgame,” highlighted the couple's desire to be acknowledged, portraying King Charles as obstinate in his interactions with them.

Financial aid for Harry and Meghan was abruptly cut off in July 2020, leaving them to fend for themselves, including funding for their security detail previously covered by the Duchy of Cornwall estate.

Despite ongoing negotiations for contracts before their official exit, the couple's decision to engage in commercial endeavors was seen as a strategic move to capitalize on their fame.

Scobie's remarks insinuated that the Sussexes resorted to airing personal grievances to generate income, leveraging their royal connections for financial gain.

The narrative painted by Scobie portrayed the couple as lacking substantial talents beyond exploiting their royal status for profit.

The blame was shifted towards the royal family for not meeting their demands for financial support, leading to public scrutiny and backlash.

The fallout from the Megxit saga exposed underlying tensions and power struggles within the royal family.

Meghan and Harry's approach to their departure was met with resistance and disapproval, particularly from Queen Elizabeth II.

Their expectation of retaining royal privileges while pursuing personal ventures overseas was met with rejection, fueling resentment and discord within the family.

In retrospect, the refusal to adhere to traditional royal protocols and expectations triggered a chain of events that culminated in public scrutiny and criticism.

The couple's perceived sense of entitlement and disregard for established norms further alienated them from the royal institution.

The repercussions of their decisions reverberated across the monarchy, exposing deep-rooted conflicts and divisions.

The aftermath of the Megxit saga underscored the complexities of royal life and the challenges of balancing personal aspirations with public responsibilities.

Meghan and Harry's journey post-royalty has been fraught with controversies and confrontations, raising questions about their motivations and intentions.

As the dust settles, the repercussions of their choices continue to shape perceptions and narratives surrounding the royal family.