Title: King Charles Blamed for Megxit Contracts as Finances Cut Off

In a recent revelation, author Omid Scobie has accused King Charles of being responsible for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's decision to sign commercial deals following their departure from the royal family.

Scobie suggests that the king's mishandling of the Megxit saga led the couple to agree to contracts they may have otherwise declined, as their finances were abruptly cut off, leaving them in need of significant financial support.

While it is true that the king initially provided financial assistance during the first year, it is worth noting that he also covered expenses such as Frogmore Cottage and even repaid a portion of the wedding costs.

However, according to Mr. Scobie's interview with The Independent, the couple required substantial funds for proper housing and security, which prompted them to pursue lucrative deals in the form of books, documentaries, and podcasts.

Their decision to sign an $81 million five-year deal with Netflix and an $18 million contract with Spotify, among others, resulted in a series of damaging revelations by Prince Harry about his father and older brother, Prince William.

These revelations were made public through the Netflix series “Harry and Meghan” and Harry's memoir.

Scobie suggests that the Sussexes only became disruptors due to the king's mishandling of their departure from the UK and their roles as senior working royals.

Critics argue that despite refusing to work for the royal family and relocating abroad, the couple now complain about the loss of benefits and privileges, labeling them as greedy and ridiculous grifters.

Other royals around the world have had their titles revoked without raising similar complaints, further fueling the controversy surrounding Meghan and Harry's actions.

In his recently released book, “Endgame,” Ahmed quotes Harry and Meghan expressing their desire to be heard, while highlighting Charles' stubbornness as a barrier to their wishes.

Mr. Scobie reveals that all financial support for the couple, including funding for their official security, was terminated in July 2020.

Previously, this support had been covered by Charles' private income from the Duchy of Cornwall estate.

It is worth mentioning that Meghan was already in negotiations for contracts prior to their departure.

Even dating back to her relationship with Harry in 2016, these deals were only signed because Netflix, Penguin Random House, and Spotify recognized their marketability and revenue potential.

The allure of tales about the royal family was well-known, and the Sussexes capitalized on this demand.

Scobie's assertion that the couple's ability to make significant money was based solely on airing their dirty laundry about the royal family is met with criticism.

He then proceeds to blame King Charles and the British royal family for being victims of this “dirty laundry sale,” accusing them of not succumbing to the Harkles' demands for financial gain.

The couple seemingly shifts blame onto the royal family, suggesting that their actions were a response to perceived mistreatment and humiliation.

The Harkles' decision to announce their departure without prior discussion with the Queen and their intention to continue representing Her Majesty's work part-time while capitalizing on their royal titles overseas has been deemed absolutely disgusting.

The assumption that the Queen would accept this arrangement without objection proved to be their biggest mistake.

It is believed that this refusal triggered a wave of anger and resentment, fueling their sense of entitlement and subsequent actions.