Angelina Jolie is â€śpouring her heart outâ€ť about Brad Pitt to Kate Middleton, according to far-fetched reports. The stories claim the actress and the duchess recently had a â€śsecret meeting.â€ť But Gossip Cop has found no evidence to support such a narrative.
The allegations originate in this weekâ€™s OK!, where itâ€™s claimed that even though Jolie is busy filming Maleficent 2, she â€śrecently found time to sneak away for a top secret catch-upâ€ť with Middleton. Itâ€™s alleged the two women have grown close over years through â€ścharity workâ€ť and â€śstay in touch via email,â€ť but had not seen one another since before Jolieâ€™s breakup with Pitt. â€śSo Kate carefully asked how things were going since the split,â€ť a so-called â€śinsiderâ€ť is quoted as saying.
â€ś[Angelina] poured her heart outâ€¦ about everything sheâ€™d been through this past year and a half, the difficulty in raising six kids as a single mom, their custody issues and missing Brad,â€ť the tabloidâ€™s untraceable source alleges. And what was Middletonâ€™s supposed response? The unnamed tipster contends, â€śShe told Angie she should take Brad back.â€ť Itâ€™s claimed Middleton advised the Oscar winner that â€śif Angie could find it in her heart to forgive him, itâ€™s worth giving their union another shot.â€ť
But among the signs that this tale was likely fabricated is that the purported â€śinsiderâ€ť goes from referring to Middleton informally as â€śKateâ€ť to formally addressing her husband as â€śPrince William.â€ť A real source connected to the royals would likely refer to both of them with formal designations. Itâ€™s also bizarre that the specious snitch maintains Middleton â€śwants to do what she can to help this couple in distress,â€ť as if she is not raising three children and carrying out daily responsibilities as a member of the monarchy. In other words, her plate is pretty full.
Itâ€™s also makes little sense to allege Middleton is stepping in now, nearly two years after Jolie filed for divorce, if the pair have supposedly been keeping in touch through email all this time. Another reason to be suspicious of this storyline is that itâ€™s never said just when this â€śsecret meetingâ€ť supposedly took place, or even exactly where. The best the magazine can offer is the vague claim that this was a â€śrecent catch-up at the palace.â€ť Additionally, the last time Jolie and Middleton had a meeting together, it was officially confirmed with an on-the-record comment from a Kensington Palace spokesperson, who gave specific details. Now a palace staffer with whom Gossip Cop spoke laughed off this phony story about a new get-together.
Apparently HollywoodLife didnâ€™t notice all the red flags, or didnâ€™t care, because the site regurgitated the outletâ€™s contentions without any fact-checking whatsoever. Whatâ€™s more, the blog doesnâ€™t even attribute the allegations to the right publication, wrongly asserting they come from Us Weekly (see screengrab below). Meanwhile, Gossip Cop took the time to investigate, and we found no proof to back up the story.
Rather, as explained above, we uncovered multiple indications that these claims were made-up. It certainly wouldnâ€™t be the first time the tabloid has manufactured articles about either star. In fact, the magazine proved it is clueless and doesnâ€™t have real access to the royal family when it falsely announced Middleton was expecting twin girls in her last pregnancy. Not only did Gossip Cop bust that cover story when it came out last December, but we were proven right when the duchess gave birth to only one child, a boy, in April.
As for Jolie, in March the outlet peddled an entirely untrue cover story about the star and Pitt calling off their divorce and renewing their vows. That was seemingly all forgotten earlier this month, when the publication moved on to insisting Jolie was â€śdating again,â€ť and â€śhead over heels for a mysterious millionaire.â€ť Tellingly, that supposed beau isnâ€™t mentioned in this new piece about Middleton urging her to get back together with Pitt. The publicationâ€™s articles show a stunning lack of accuracy, consistency and credibility. And while HollywoodLife may have fallen for this latest one, readers most certainly shouldnâ€™t.