Are Kate Middleton and Meghan Markle "both pregnant" and "due the same day"? That's the far-fetched premise of a tabloid cover story. Gossip Cop can debunk this phony and untrue report.
The new cover of In Touch announces "a girl for Kate and twins for Meghan," and even touts, "Palace Confirms!" Kensington Palace, however, has not confirmed anything. This is a prime example of tabloid trickery, and one that the magazine is copying from its new sister publications. Last month, AMI purchased In Touch, to add to its collection of Star, OK!, Us Weekly, the National Enquirer and Globe. And just a few weeks ago, OK! pulled this same stunt, falsely declaring on its cover that the palace "confirmed" Markle was pregnant with twins.
It was a complete lie, and now In Touch is clearly following in its sister outlet's footsteps and trying to similarly dupe readers. To make matters worse, the tabloid is trying to further the narrative by insisting Markle and Middleton are both expecting. And while the Duchess of Sussex is rumored to be pregnant, we recently busted Life & Style, yet another sister publication, for a bogus cover story about Middleton being pregnant with her fourth child.
So this new misguided cover story combines both fake pregnancy claims to further deceive fans. An almost assuredly fictional "source" is quoted as saying, "Meghan conceived just a few weeks after Kate." How are they "due the same day" then, as said on the cover? It's alleged that because "multiples" are often delivered early, Markle's "due date is around the same time as Kate's." Exclaims this seemingly nonexistent tipster, "They could give birth the same day!" That's not quite the same as "due the same day."
A purported "insider" goes on to assert, "Kate and Meghan bonded over the men they married. Now they're bonding over being pregnant together." But what about the In Touch cover story from late June in which it was alleged Markle and Middleton were in such a bad feud that even Princes Harry and William were stuck in the middle? Here, only a couple of weeks later, the outlet and its "insider" are conveniently changing their tune, claiming, "That's all water under the bridge now."
The tabloid further contends, "While the pregnancies are the subject of plenty of palace buzz, the duchesses have only shared their news with a small group of friends and family." Why, then, is In Touch touting "Palace Confirms" on its cover? Because, as we explained above, it is trying to trick readers without outright lies. In fact, Kensington Palace even tells Gossip Cop on the record that they did not "confirm" anything to the magazine about Middleton or Markle being pregnant.
There is additional evidence that is all a fabrication, such as when it's alleged that Markle "wants to deliver in the U.S." That would not be feasible for a number of reasons, and the former "Suits" star has given no indication that she plans to spend any length of time living in America now that she's moved to London. As for Middleton, the age difference between Prince George and Princess Charlotte is nearly two years, while there are nearly three years between Charlotte and Prince Louis. Given that she has spaced out her previous pregnancies, it is simply not believable to contend she's already expecting again just a few months after giving birth.
Conclusion: The cover of In Touch claims the palace "confirmed" Kate Middleton and Meghan Markle are both pregnant, but a spokesperson at Kensington Palace tells us no such confirmation was issued. And while the cover also asserts they are "due the same day," the story inside the issue alleges they're due "around the same time" and "could" give birth the same day. The tabloid is copying from OK! and Life & Style, its sister publications, which spread these false claims last month. They are no more true now than they were then, which is to say they're not true at all. UPDATE: While Gossip Cop was right about both Duchesses not being due on the same day, on October 15, Kensington Palace confirmed Marke is pregnant, but with just one baby.
Gossip Cop has determined this story is totally false.