Norway’s crown princess has become embroiled in another scandal after newly unsealed files appeared to show her years of extensive contact with the late child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
The latest tranche of Epstein files, released on Friday by the US justice department, appear to include nearly 1,000 mentions of the crown princess, Mette-Marit.
The files include scores of emails traded between the two, suggesting they were in contact from 2011 to 2014, the Norwegian daily VG reported. Mette-Marit married the future king of Norway in 2001.
The revelations come at a sensitive time for the royal family. The trial of Mette-Marit’s son, Marius Borg Høiby for rape is due to begin on Tuesday. He was born from a relationship before she married Crown Prince Haakon
Høiby is facing 38 charges, including the alleged rape of four women as well as alleged assault and drug offences. If convicted he could face up to 16 years in prison. Høiby has denied the most serious charges, including those of sexual abuse.
Parasites.
Good thing my queen is a decent women with nice, well educated kids. I has to suck to have parasites like this live at your expense.
all the NONCE kings and princes had ties with epsteins MS kung fu master.
He was first sentenced in 2008…
Looks bad until you realise how afraid of confrontations Norwegians are
The movement to get rid of the parasitic monarchy in Norway got a lot of traction this week, so that is nice.
There is an actual hearing in Parliament this tuesday about abolishing the monarchy. Not caused by this but happily strengthened.
You can bet that once the inevitable population-wide vote happens on whether to keep the monarchy, I will vote no. I already didn’t like having a monarchy from before, now doubly so.
I’ve traditionally been a supporter of keeping the monarchy for its diplomatic functions and (mostly) unifying force among people, but this does feel like a sea-change. Maybe opinions in Norway are more forgiving, I don’t know–I moved away many years ago. In my opinion, it’s probably time to re-evaluate whether we (Norway) want to keep this going. It was decided decades ago to keep it at least until the current Crown Prince had his turn, but now that’s looking like a bad idea. They need to do something, and hopefully they can still wind it down with some dignity. Maybe it’s possible to make a nice, clean break when King Harald passes on. Either way, it should be up to the People.
I’m not 100% convinced having a President will be better, seeing as some Presidents like to act as if they’re kings. But with all the scandals, I think if anyone still believes monarchs are immune to political influence, they should wake up now.
PS: I was wondering if you have some more information about the hearing (e.g. news article). I can’t find it in the Norwegian media. (I read/speak Norwegian).
You can have a President without having a Presidential system - like, for example, Germany - were that post is mainly being a figurehead/top-diplomat with mainly the power of shaming parliament when they go overboard with some laws, both not actually able to block it, possible with some limited power to dissolve parliament and call new elections.
Basically it’s the same thing as a modern day monarch in a Democratic nation, except that people actually get to chose who gets the post, if they turn out to be bad at it they get replaced after 4 years rather than being there for life and they don’t actually own a massive chunk of wealth for historical reasons (like, for example, the British Royal Family).
I’ve lived under Presidential systems (Portugal) and Constitutional Monarchies (The Netherlands, Britain) and vastly prefer the former: the latter is especially fucked up in Britain were the Royals actually have real power (to block laws) - if seldom used - and are the cornerstone of a well entrenched system of patronage and class segregation which is far beyond anything I’ve seen elsewhere in Europe, though granted in The Netherlands The Royals were a lot closer to normal people - to the point that before becoming King the current ruler used to work as a pilot for KLM - than in Britain.
Portugal doesn’t have a Presidential system, it’s a Semi-Presidential one.
You’re correct, similarly to Germany it has a President with limited powers which are far less than Parliament or the Govern, not a Presidential System (like the US or France) were the President actually has executive power.
I guess ‘No Kings’ is doing something after all
Yeah, power corrupts. But royalty is excempt from scrutiny way too much. The king keeps pardoning finance crime buddies and it’s not even mentioned in the media like other corruption would be.
Anyway, https://stortinget.no/ has info on the hearings :)
Thank you, I found it here. I’m a little bit surprised it’s not in the media more.
Pretty sure because it’s a routine tradition, and is always expected to end in the favor of keeping the monarchy. So it’s not really too interesting unless you are a politician
Does the Norwegian monarchy also generate a significant amount of revenue for the government like the British one does?
Strange typo, you wrote “generate” instead of “cost”
The buildings and overboard “state folklore” are what generate revenue, not the Royals - the probability of ever seeing a Royal in person, either as a tourist or a local, is basically zero.
Meanwhile the Royals are a cornerstone of a massive system of patronage and class segregation, not to mention being one of the wealthiest families in Britain. Oh, and the king also has the power to block laws, though he seldom uses it and apparently will instead in the background use the threat of it and of shaming governments (look up the “black spider memos”, which date back to his time as prince).
They’re pretty much the most anti-Democratic Royals in Europe by a long margin, IMHO.
I asked this when the final season of The Crown came out. What EXACTLY does the monarch do? There was so much talk of “the work we do for this country” but no explanation of it? In the same vein, how exactly do they generate revenue?
Without clicking I already know what both of those videos will be.
CGP Grey is a liberal hack. He’s very skilled at explaining things in an entertaining and easy-to-understand way, but he’s really bad at making it clear when what he’s “explaining” is his (or someone else’s) opinion and not an actual fact. And when it is his opinion, far too often it’s a bad one, tainted by some of the laziest liberal status quo bs.
This is one such example, and Shaun’s response is justifiably scathing.
I also found it particularly telling when he did his “guns, germs, and steel” explainer (a book that is widely criticised by historians for its vastly oversimplified explanations), and he responded to criticism by laughing it off, and saying there was no problem. But when he later did a video and made a minor mistake by using the name of a submarine-based missile for what was actually a ground-based missile (or something along those lines), he made a huge deal about how important his integrity is and how he could not possibly live with himself if he allowed that misinformation to go uncorrected.
Suffice it to say, I was not particularly surprised when I later learnt the reason Grey pulled out of Nebula was that he (and Veritasium, IIRC?) wanted a business model/corporate structure which would allow him and other early members to profit off of the work of later-added members. An opinion that put him at odds with the other early founders like Wendover and Real Engineering, who preferred the more equitable model.
Suffice it to say, I was not particularly surprised when I later learnt the reason Grey pulled out of Nebula was that he (and Veritasium, IIRC?) wanted a business model/corporate structure which would allow him and other early members to profit off of the work of later-added members. An opinion that put him at odds with the other early founders like Wendover and Real Engineering, who preferred the more equitable model.
Really? I never did find any info about why he and Kurzgesagt (not Veritasium) left. Where did you hear this? (I’m not doubting you I’m just curious.)
Ah it was Kurzgesagt? Yeah that…really checks out. That dude is sketchy af.
I’ve just gone down a rabbit hole of old Reddit threads. This comment by Brian of Real Engineering is the source for that claim. At the very least, it shows they weren’t interested in putting in effort to grow the platform into the fantastic place it has become since their departure. At worst, Brian’s speculation as to their motives paints them in a very unflattering light.
But it seems it was my mistaken recollection that it was specifically about discussions relating to the “creator-owned” business structure.
You can read further down in that thread for a comment of my own summarising why exactly I described Kurzgesagt as “sketchy af” above. Or for more detail, here’s another thread on the subject where I go back and forth with someone staunchly intent on defending Kurzgesagt despite the overwhelming evidence against him.
I’m pretty sure this is the thread that got me silently banned from all CGP Grey–related subreddits, too. Not a proper ban, but all my comments are silently auto-removed, presumably by Grey’s bot account that mods all his subreddits. I went months cheerfully commenting in Hello Internet (RIP) threads and getting no engagement before I realised I had been banned. Back then I was actually a huge fan of Grey’s in spite of my growing frustrations with some of his content, so that really stung.
Oh and just for fun, here’s another thread I came across with some other people detailing some of the grift-like penny-pinching behaviour from Grey, wherein he treats his audience not as a community but as a resource to be extracted…until it’s no longer useful: https://old.reddit.com/r/JetLagTheGame/comments/1iom4n4/whats_bens_beef_with_cgp_grey/
Thanks, that was interesting, and pretty neatly sums up the revenue side of things (and why I think it’s a bs argument for their continued existence)
I’m still curious about the “work” that The Crown (show) kept going on about. As mentioned in the rebuttal video, all of that revenue essentially comes about through just existing (and there’s no reason it couldn’t continue even if the monarchy were officially abolished)
From the outside, (and going by the events in the show) it seems to be just cutting ribbons, and hosting/attending parties. Oh, and a speech once a year. Is that the extent of their work, or do they actually serve some political function that couldn’t be done by a regular old diplomat?
Officially, the British monarch can reject any bills that Parliament sends them, effectively vetoing it, but no king or queen has exercised that power since 1708.
They’ve used threats instead, as well as the power of shaming and the influence they have in many places including the Press (for example, pretty much the whole Board of the BBC has a royal title, be it a Peerage or higher, and this is similar in quite a number of other places, both in the public and the private sector).
Look up the “black spider memos” from the time the current King was still a Prince.
like the British one does?
pfft. that was some fantastic propaganda. royalty in no way generates revenue, they’re fucking parasites.
I honestly don’t keep up with them much, so I can’t say what the current status is. I didn’t even realize until today that Mette-Marit had been connected with Epstein already back in 2019.
It’s not just about money, though. When I still lived there ('90s), the common sentiment seemed to be that though they have no political power (even less so than the British), they were good, wholesome ambassadors for Norway and served as a sort of cultural focal point that “everyone” shared pride in. (Obviously not a 100% true, but if you’re Norwegian you know what I mean.)
Importantly, one point of pride was that they weren’t as embroiled in scandals as other royals. They were “of the people”, with one example often cited that King Olav during the oil crisis took his skis on the bus instead of driving. That kind of thing.
The current line of Norwegian royals is even pretty new, so to speak. King Haakon VII was chosen by committee in 1905 after the dissolution of the union. At the time, they passed on becoming a republic. So, it felt more like they had been selected by us rather than they just inherited everything.
But: the whole Epstein business, greed, political influence and all that flies directly in the face of all that pride. That’s why I think that case is probably lost now. The trust is gone, the monarchy is tarnished. It’s become a liability and expense rather than a point of pride.
That actually makes a lot of sense. Coming from a country heavily influenced by Thomas Paine especially on the topic of nobility it’s always been weird to me when such egalitarian countries as most of Scandinavia and the Netherlands maintain monarchies.
A: she’s married in. Not actual you know. Heritage
Are you mansplaining my own fucking country of 45 years to me?
I’m Norwegian…
*monarchsplaining
deleted by creator
Sounds like the apple didn’t fall far from the tree.
A lifetime of living without consequence where your every whim is met creates dangerously broken people
What happened here is actually worse somehow. Mette marit was a “commoner” known on her circles as a fun party/rave girl. The usual drugs included. She had a son (Marius) with someone from that walk of life. He had the chance to turn 8 or 9 i think before having the title of “royalty” thrust uppon him at the same time his single mother got swept away on all sorts of royal adventures.
Not hard at all to see how that can fuck you up royally.
Edit: just remembered she had a sextape from the good old days, and since it was only of interest to us Norwegians and the internett wasn’t as big as it is now they’ve managed to scrub it. Or that might just have been rumors, but I’m like 80% sure i saw it at one of the early 2000’s LAN parties.
I was told that royal families are all ceremonial and that they don’t have any real power, but we keep finding them embroiled with people who have real power.
Really makes you think.
In theory, yes. In our country, our royal family has an undisclosed amount of money, get an undisclosed amount of money from the taxpayer and has a number of other sources of income as well. One of the nephews of the king has a huge real estate business built upon his family money.
Fucking parasites.
Any social influencers of this level obviously have indirect power and anyone who claims otherwise is delusional.
That being said, I do think it’s possible that ceremonial representation can be beneficial. I’d love states start electing purely ceremonial roles more as it’s a really powerful social tool for uniting people and can be done right.
deleted by creator
Money==power. Monarchs roll in money.
No times 2. Monarchs don’t really roll in money, and to elaborate let’s dive into your first statement, and why it’s off. Money is only really power if you have the freedom to buy with it as you want. Monarchs have very little freedom of any in that regard. Often you’ll find that the vast majority of the so-called appanage comes with a note of exactly what they should pay for. Like, paying for renovations of buildings you don’t appreciate living in and stills being told to live in it. Agreed, they do live a rather decent lifestyle, and there’s no reason to feel sorry for monarchs’ financial setup, but it comes at a hefty price of a lifetime commitment to no freedom in some regards. Personally I really appreciate the royal family in Denmark. The Danish king is a wise, highly trained military man, who also is a father driving his kids to school in a flatbed bicycle. It’s just good PR for a country to have a king (and queen) like that.
The dominos start to fall
Not a Norwegian, but I would hope so.
As a Norwegian, I would be perfectly fine with seeing the monarchy abolished whenever the passing of our current monarcs occur.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Norwegian here, and I don’t think it’s gonna change a whole lot. Well, not for her, at least.
Personally I don’t care enough about them, and I don’t get the impression anyone under 60 care that much either, neither positive or negative. Her husband is genuinely a nice person, so is her father in law (yes, I’ve met them both). Her son is a scumbag, though. (And he almost ran into me on a bicycle when he was 5 or so!)
So if anyone wants to litigate against her, I’m not gonna stand in the way, but for now this looks mostly like a case of “Should’ve known better”, something several government officials have publicly stated.
Just to clarify my stance on monarchy: Conflicted. In theory it does make sense to have someone who can veto everything on behalf of the state if the government goes weapons grade guano. However, the apolitical nature of a monarch pretty much stand in the way of this. And on the other hand, I’m not a big fan of inherited power.
But all in all, I don’t really care that much. Larger portions of my taxes go to stupider things.While I agree that having an independent body from the main political organ makes sense, I feel like a monarchy isn’t a great symbol to have in the first place
And what’s going to stop future scandals from happening? Or consequences for them? If a future king does something bad, we can’t exactly fire them and replace them with someone else, as that’s not how a monarchy works. We only got one tool, and it’s to abolish the monarchy. It doesn’t feel like great checks and balances
Generally I am against inherent power. And a monarchy is the peak of that, as you simply are in a position of power by having a lucky birth. It is true that lucky births happen constantly and are everywhere, especially if you get born in norway, but it feels wrong to actively support it.
It just doesn’t really feel like a system that has a place today. Though I do also realize that there’s problems with having a president or the like as well. But generally I support more democracy, not less.
And also as a final note like, if this went hidden for so long until the files got released, I wonder what other stuff got hidden as well? I mean, we got pretty much directly lied to here back in 2019
I’m just uncomfortable with systems that enforce a hierarchy. I think we could do with less of that
They can definitely replace the monarch. Remember it’s a constitutional monarchy where the monarch has only ceremonial power. The throne has been given to the current royal family by the people. The people can take the crown away if they want to. Parliament just needs to amend the constitution. Also the monarch can be encouraged to step down if they are embroiled in a scandal.
Also monarchs are just humans their heads can be chopped off like any of us. They should never forget what happened to their cousin during the French Revolution.
Who would replace the monarch though?
At that point it’s literally just an appointed minister by another name. And I’d rather have the position taken by someone who doesn’t live in a literal castle
And yes, I know it’s a constitutional monarchy, I live here :)
Yeah at that point it will just turn into a republic. But nothing is stopping Norwegians to go into that direction except tRAdiShyUn and decades of brainwashing.
But that’s literally what I’m arguing for though…?
Her son is a scumbag
when he was 5
Thoughts on the monarchy aside, I think it’s a little unfair to judge someone based on how they acted as a really young child
My assessment was not based on that one incident from when he was five.
Yup, I see that now. I agree, he’s a scumbag
And that’s why you shouldn’t white-knight random people you don’t know
Oh go fuck yourself. From the way it’s written it’s not unreasonable to think they’re talking about the kid running them over at 5 years old. Turning out to be a douchebag later doesn’t make it OK to judge a 5 year old.
No one is judging anyone except you.
False. I’m judging you to be a moron.
God forbid we’re unfair to this guy https://www.cbsnews.com/news/norway-crown-princess-son-rape-trial-marius-borg-hoiby/
Ok, fair. I didn’t know about that
Norway’s Crown what? Are they from the past or something?
Are you truly so ignorant?
The constitutional monarchy is from 1814, but our real political power is democratically elected every 4 years. There is a significant minority who wants a republic instead, but most of us like having an unpolitical symbolic head of state to do the speaches, diplomacy and ribbon cutting that we can (mostly) all get behind. It’s the same system as in Sweden and Denmark.
We almost had a king instated in 1917 in Finland. The right wing party Kokoomus was desperate for a boot to lick.
It don’t want to should sound disrespectful to the finish language, but kokoomus sounds like the villain of a Mario spinoff.
A lot of Europe has monarchs. Yes, the french and American mind struggles to comprehend this, but they just don’t ger rid of them
Just as a good few other European countries, yes. Most definitely yes.
And America now.
