In recent news, Megan Markle’s new PR team has been working tirelessly to reshape her public image.

One such example is a recent article published by Marie Claire, which aimed to absolve Megan of any blame for the rift within the royal family.

However, this attempt to rewrite history is falling flat, as the evidence against Megan is already widely known.

The article, titled “The Displaced Blame,” tries to portray Megan as an innocent victim who had no hand in the turmoil that unfolded.

It even goes as far as criticizing the term “Megxit” for allegedly unfairly placing blame on Megan.

But let’s take a step back and examine the facts.

Was it not Megan and Harry who launched scathing attacks on their own family after their departure?

Did they not make the last months of the late Queen and Prince Philip’s lives a misery?

The evidence speaks for itself.

To dismiss these actions as mere displacement of blame is disingenuous.

The writer, Rachel Birchfield, argues that Harry was unhappy within the royal family long before he met Megan.

She claims that the term “Megxit” perpetuates the societal tendency to blame women for problems.

But what about instances when the woman is indeed at fault?

Should we turn a blind eye to their actions?

Birchfield cites an article from the Mirror that suggests Harry always desired independence within the royal family.

While this may be true, it does not negate the fact that he still wanted to pursue his own path while remaining a part of the royal institution.

Furthermore, Birchfield quotes Omid Scobie, a royal correspondent, who states that plans to split the household were in motion before Megan entered the picture.

However, Scobie’s credibility is questionable, considering his track record of publishing potentially biased information.

The article also references a piece from the Telegraph by Bryony Gordon, which claims that Megan gave Harry the courage to break free from the “crazy cult of royalty.”

While it is true that Harry may have harbored these feelings since childhood, it was Megan who supposedly emboldened him to act upon them.

This narrative conveniently ignores the fact that Megan and Harry proceeded to publicly criticize and exploit their royal connections for personal gain.

The crux of the issue lies not in Harry and Megan’s desire to leave their roles as working royals, but rather in how they handled their departure.

Their decision to tarnish the reputation of the royal family and profit from it is what truly upset people.

In a closing editor’s note, Birchfield asserts that it is not our place to judge what happened during Megxit or its aftermath.

While everyone is entitled to their opinions, she implores readers to refrain from blaming Megan.

However, this plea fails to acknowledge the impact of Megan’s actions and the consequences they had on public perception.

If Harry and Megan genuinely wish to alter the narrative surrounding them, they must reflect on their behavior and make a genuine effort to change.

Merely telling others that their thinking is wrong is insufficient.

Actions speak louder than words, and it is through their actions that they will ultimately be judged.

In conclusion, the recent surge in puff pieces attempting to rewrite history is both perplexing and concerning.

Rather than investing resources into manipulating public opinion, Harry and Megan would be better served by redirecting their efforts towards meaningful endeavors that benefit others.

Only then can their reputations truly evolve.

What are your thoughts on these attempts to rewrite history?

Share your opinions in the comments below.

And remember to like and share this video with others who may find it interesting.

Don’t forget to subscribe to our channel for more updates from Kate Middleton and the Queen team.

Thank you for watching, and have a wonderful day.