Misleading Headline

[retrocop]

https://metro.co.uk/2019/05/04/kate-middleton-wants-fourth-royal-baby-prince-william-9411081/?ico=pushly-notifcation-small&;utm_source=pushly.

Does any one else think this is a badly worded Headline? Who did she have the other babies with?

[youngmafbog]

Cat's out the bag then?

[dannyk13]

Bit of a faux-pas.

[anneasquith]

I think she means as opposed to Harry, now he is married . :,*)

[Sqad]

LOL...no big deal, as i think that we all know what she meant.

[hereIam]

I admit it's a badly worded headline retro.

[Old_Geezer]

Who were the other 3 with ?

[Old_Geezer]

That'l learn me to not rush to the link immediately, then reply. (Probably won't.)

[dannyk13]

OG. Have a guess.

[CrapAtCryptics]

Probably have footmen to do the squidgey stuff

[Peter Pedant]

//I think she means as opposed to Harry, now he is married//

as oppsoed to a royal baby with her father in law - who at the age of ninety might step up to the mark ?

damn - the father in law is Prince Chuck, and not the Duke of Edinburgh

[Peter Pedant]

does anyone think that it is the old men on this site who have the most disgusting imaginations?

what DO they spend their time doing ?

[Old_Geezer]

No point in guessing. And I wasn't there to check.

[roopower]

Katherine hasn't been Middleton for several years and Meghan isn't Markle. Media can't seem to grasp that