In a shocking turn of events, reports are emerging that staff members from Meghan Markle‘s organization, Archewell, are leaving in droves due to what insiders claim is her intolerable behavior.
The backdrop of this drama?
A controversial trip to Colombia that has raised eyebrows and questions about the couple’s motivations.
Is it possible that they are being used as pawns in a political game aimed at distracting from pressing government issues?
It certainly seems so.
Andy Signor, the host of Popcorn Palace, has been closely following this unfolding saga, emphasizing that the public might soon realize the truth behind these allegations.
Just last week, the resignation of Chief of Staff Josh Kettler sent shockwaves through royal circles.
His departure marks the ninth employee to leave Archewell since the couple’s arrival in the United States, bringing the total to 18 resignations—an alarming turnover rate for an organization that prides itself on family values and charitable endeavors.
So, what’s fueling this high turnover?
According to a source who has worked with the couple, Meghan’s behavior is largely to blame.
Reports suggest that she has a tendency to belittle her staff, creating a toxic work environment.
A photographer who captured their wedding recounted a particularly distressing encounter where Meghan dismissed his creative efforts in a harsh manner, leaving him in tears.
Similarly, a florist described being bullied by Meghan for a harmless social media post, vowing never to collaborate with her again despite the prestige that comes with such an association.
The timing of these departures coincides with the couple’s recent trip to Colombia—a decision that raises eyebrows, especially considering the country’s current climate of violence and crime.
Colombia has seen a surge in drug-related violence and kidnappings, prompting travel advisories that suggest extreme caution.
This begs the question: why would Meghan and Harry choose to visit a place deemed unsafe, particularly when they’ve expressed concerns about their own security in the past?
Their itinerary includes attending events focused on cyberbullying and interacting with students in Bogotá.
However, critics have labeled this trip as little more than a public relations stunt, questioning whether their presence will genuinely benefit the communities they aim to serve.
NewsNation’s national security contributor dismissed the trip as “laughable,” pointing out that the U.S. State Department has issued warnings against travel to Colombia due to ongoing crime and terrorism risks.
Insiders have noted that this venture appears to be less about altruism and more about securing favorable media coverage.
The couple’s previous trips have drawn similar criticisms, with many suggesting that they are leveraging their royal connections for personal gain rather than genuine humanitarian efforts.
As one PR expert remarked, their actions risk being perceived as “poverty porn,” showcasing underprivileged communities for the sake of social media clout.
Moreover, the financial implications of their visit have stirred discontent among Colombian citizens.
With an average monthly salary of just $350, many locals are struggling to make ends meet, leading to frustration over the couple’s perceived exploitation of their plight.
Critics argue that instead of offering online safety courses, which may seem out of touch, the couple should focus on addressing the very real economic challenges facing the people of Colombia.
As the couple navigates this politically charged environment, they have also attracted significant security measures, including a convoy of 14 vehicles.
This extravagant display raises questions about the appropriateness of such resources being allocated for a visit that some view as self-serving.
Many Colombians are left wondering why taxpayer money is being spent on ensuring the safety of a couple whose motives are under scrutiny.
Adding to the controversy, Meghan’s reported wardrobe expenses during the trip have sparked outrage.
Allegedly spending £72,000 on three outfits, her fashion choices have been criticized as tone-deaf in a country grappling with poverty.
This extravagant spending further fuels the narrative that the couple is more concerned with appearances than genuine engagement.
Amidst all this turmoil, Meghan continues to champion her role as a mother and advocate.
Yet, her children remain conspicuously absent from her public engagements, raising questions about the authenticity of her claims.
Critics argue that if being a mother is her top priority, her actions should reflect that commitment more genuinely.
With each passing day, the narrative surrounding Meghan and Harry’s actions becomes increasingly complex.
What initially appeared to be a charitable endeavor is now viewed through a lens of skepticism.
As they navigate this tricky landscape, many are left wondering: are they truly committed to making a difference, or are they simply looking to bolster their own image?
As this story continues to unfold, it remains to be seen how the public and the media will respond to the couple’s actions in Colombia.
With growing discontent and skepticism surrounding their motives, the couple may need to reassess their approach if they hope to regain the trust of both the public and their staff.
The stakes are high, and the outcome of this royal drama remains uncertain.
