Friend Prince Harry and Meghan Marle He supported the royal couple as a critique for their lives because they appeared from their roles as older royal.

The Duke and Duchess Sussex came under fire for various reasons from its exit 2020. years.

Now their close Pal, the renowned chef José Andrés, slipped the hatred he received, saying that Prince Harry and Meghan Mark used their platforms "to live in his cave".

Talking to Page six 2025 GALA presented on the city harvest: Canavla in New York, José Andrés expressed confusion over constant criticism aimed at Prince Harry and Meghan, because they deviated from royal duties and moved to the United States

He defended the duo, calling them "an amazing couple" and noted that he just wants to "talk about the good things they do."

The chef pointed out that Susexexes could choose to be "in their cave and do nothing" after leaving the royal life, but they use their platforms "to be their platforms and life."

Giving the context for his remarks, Andrés recalled how Harry and Meghan provided help for surviving wildfires Los Angeles.

"When they were in LA during the fire, they were truly in fires," the non-profit general manager added. "When the cameras didn't roll, they were there listening to people, and they made them feel like the most important person in the world."

Some of the recent arrears focused on Prince Harry and Meghan came from Dr. Sophie Chandauka, Chairman Harry African Charity, Sentebale.

Last month, after resignation of the founder of the Invictus game from the organization, Chandauka made headings by marking the brand as "toxic" in the bomb interview.

"Risk Number one for this organization was the toxicity of the brand of its lead sponsor", dr. Chandauka, before adding that a couple deviates from his royal life to the fall of charitable donors and interfere with his ability to employ.

"When you start interviewing people, they ask questions about it, well, these mixed messages around the patron", she added, by Mirror.

The Commissioner Chairman earlier accused Harry for harassment and mizogini, with his claims and an organization that was now investigating a charity commission.

Another individual who issued a series of criticism against Harry and Meghan, former editor-in-chief of Vanity Tina Brown.

In chat with TelegraphShe claimed that the Duke and Duchess had a greater positive impact as they act under the royal umbrella than through everything they did from intrusion from the monarchy.

She said, "He and Meghan talk about" doing good, "but what do they do? Good thing you can do as a kingdom is so much more powerful."

The Veteran journalist then branded a couple as a "disaster tourist", referencing their visit to the survivors in Chifornia Wildfires.

She also claimed that he had a great "appetite for money", who believes they led them to "catastrophic decisions", such as "reserve" interviews.

PreviouslyBrown slammed Meghan through his cooking, "with love, Meghan," and the objection of the former actress to promote her lifestyle, as always.

Speaking about the show, Brown claimed that he was proof that Meghan had a "unmistakable instinct for which he misunderstood and" she never thought of a convincing person. "

She also used sharply imposed notes when referring Meghan's brand of lifestyle.