Harry and Meghan have sent out a Christmas card featuring their children, Archie and Lilibet. But wait—haven’t we seen these kids somewhere before? Well, it turns out, Archie looks suspiciously like a three-year-old version of himself from the Netflix docuseries. Fans of the royal family quickly pointed out something odd: the photo of Archie shows him wearing the exact same outfit—a jumper, jeans, and trainers—that he wore three years ago during the Netflix special, when he was photographed in the “chicken cube.” Is that a coincidence? Unlikely.
As for little Lilibet, she’s rocking the same dress she allegedly wore last Thanksgiving. How nostalgic to recycle both outfits and children, right? But the plot thickens. Observant fans also noticed that even the dogs in the photo seem like they’ve been copy-pasted from past appearances. The shadows are missing, and Harry’s shoes have an odd glow, a sign of sloppy editing. Honestly, who needs Christmas magic when you have Photoshop?
Amateur critics have pointed out that the lighting on Harry’s shoes doesn’t match the rest of the scene, and the overall composition screams “cut and paste.” Do they really think people won’t notice? This isn’t just a Christmas card; it’s a case study in what happens when you underestimate the power of the internet. Remember the outrage over Kate’s Mother’s Day photo? Well, this Christmas card is stirring up its own controversy, and it might just be worse. The whole thing feels like a digital art disaster rather than a festive gesture.
Now, let’s dive into the royal conspiracy rabbit hole. Some fans are even questioning whether these children truly exist. With no birth certificates, no official christenings, and no clear family portraits, the speculation is growing. If these kids were as real as Harry and Meghan’s credibility, we might be in for a wild ride. Adding to the drama, royal insiders have suggested that King Charles is demanding official documentation for Archie and Lilibet. Without it, they could be removed from the line of succession.
One particularly wild theory circulating is that the kids in the photo aren’t even Archie and Lilibet. Some claim that Lilibet looks eerily similar to Hartford Clark, the daughter of Stassi Schroeder from *Vanderpump Rules*. The outfit Lilibet is wearing is strikingly similar to one Hartford wore recently, adding fuel to the fire. And why does Lilibet, allegedly three years old, appear almost as tall as Archie, who’s supposedly five?
As for Archie, his hair isn’t just red—it’s the same famous red locks Harry is known for. Because if there’s one thing Harry and Meghan love, it’s shaping a narrative. Never mind that Lilibet’s hair, which was long enough to sit on just weeks ago (according to Harry), is now suddenly cropped and unremarkable.
And then, there’s the pièce de résistance: Meghan, in a move that many have called a “classic Diana moment,” stretches her arms out to welcome the children. Subtlety is apparently not Meghan’s strong suit. While some may see this as a sweet homage to Princess Diana, most of the internet finds it downright creepy. Imagine marrying someone who mimics your deceased mother—it’s not just a red flag, it’s an entire flag factory.
Finally, the ultimate question: why would anyone use a Christmas card where the children’s faces are turned away? Isn’t the whole point of a Christmas card to showcase a happy family? Instead, we’re presented with the backs of two children who might not even recognize their parents, given how often Harry and Meghan are jet-setting around the globe.
If Harry and Meghan were aiming to spark conversation, congratulations—they’ve succeeded. But if their goal was to spread holiday cheer, they might want to try again next year. Perhaps with a real photographer, some updated outfits, and their actual kids.
