Apr 5 2024

Why Executive Orders are Unconstitutional

Posted Apr 5, 2024 by Martin Armstrong

These are just a few of the onslaught of Executive Orders Bidens signed within hours of entering the White House. He not only opened the border to the flood of illegal aliens that are now getting free healthcare and tax-free money and housing that Americans are not entitled to, but he immediately went to deal with the transgender issue, making that a national crisis and shoving it down everyone’s throats who never even heard about the subject before, and restored all the money to promote this fake science of Climate Change.

People ask me if I donate to the Judicial Watch. The answer is NO!!!! I have written to them, and they have refused to respond. They will NOT defend the Constitution and address this issue of Executive Orders. Biden can issue an executive order, which you can violate and go to prison as if it were legislation by We the People. They BS all the time that we live in this fake democracy when it is an autocracy no different from what they claim Putin is and when we should die on some battlefield to defend the Constitution that they ignore.

ALL LAWS are supposed to be enacted by THE PEOPLE. Just look at the Appointments Clause of the Constitution. This empowers the President to nominate public officials, and only with the advice and consent (confirmation) of the US Senate is such an appointment made. Then how can the President revoke everything that the previous administration did, which Congress approved in many cases, and pretend he has the power to act as a DICTATOR? Using this executive order is anti-democracy, and I maintain it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL, for it is always done to circumvent the people or any public debate. If the president CANNOT appoint someone to even the Supreme Court with an executive order, then how can he create a law that will send you to prison? Roosevelt confiscated all the gold with an EXECUTIVE ORDER.

This is what they expect Americans to defend and die on foreign battlefields for an autocracy that circumvents WE THE PEOPLE.

When it comes time to redesign the new form of government post-2032, probably in 2037, we MUST eliminate any of this nonsense of Executive Orders. They intended to express only how to enforce a Congress-created law – not some backroom deal. They have been so abused, transforming the presidency into a virtual dictatorship. This is why the United States will split probably into three separate countries:

Pacific Coast, perhaps named Terra Aequalitatem(Land of Equality)
New England may call Terra Novae Marx (Land of New Marxism)
The Bible Belt/South might call themselves Terra Libertatis (Land of Liberty)

Apr 4 2024

The Progress on National EV Charging Stations

Posted Apr 4, 2024 by Martin Armstrong

Governments globally are in a rush to transition away from fossil fuels. The US government threw $7.5 billion at the fabricated problem in 2022 to build a network of EV charging stations. The Infrastructure Law of November 2021 promised to build half a million charging stations throughout the nation by 2030.

So, how is the government doing on this lofty promise? They have built a grand total of SEVEN charging stations in four states since the bill was passed. The Department of Transportation has failed to comment on the slow roll out, while the Federal Highway Administration insists they are carefully choosing their locations, with their paid for politicians claiming it will be “as easy as finding a gas station.”

The government is confident that it can achieve this target as early as 2027 – only three years from now. They make promises without having a plan in place. Biden believes half of all new car sales will be electric by 2030 per the climate change initiative. Only 7.6% of vehicles in the country are electric, and both consumers and the private sector have vocally stated that they do not want to switch away from their current vehicles. It is an unreasonable request. Not only are these vehicles more expensive and less reliable, but there are simply not enough charging stations to make them a viable option.

The government will continue throwing money at the non-existent problem. They awarded $2.5 billion in grants to implement these stations in disadvantaged communities where no one can actually afford to buy an electric vehicle. I have written countless articles about the costs associated with EVs. Funny enough, aside from gasoline, the production of EVs is not climate-friendly in the least.

The real goal is to make car ownership less obtainable. This all falls into line with Agenda 2030 and the plans for 15-minute cities where transportation will be public and not private.

The private sector does not want EVs. They see that the demand is simply not there, and they have been pushing back on these measures. These Marxists who want to seize the means of production fail to realize that there is no progress without innovation, and companies are not going to transition into non-profit organizations to support the climate zealots. In December 2023, over 3,000 auto dealers from all 50 states penned a letter to President Joe Biden, explaining that his target of forcing 50% of all car purchases to be electric by 2030 is unattainable.

The National Renewable Energy Laboratory at the US Department of Energy believes the US needs 1.2 million charging stations by 2030, with the White House aiming for 500,000. They have built SEVEN charging stations. The private sector does not want to manufacture more EVs, and the people do not want to buy them. The government utterly ignores its constituents and expects us to obey its outlandish commands without taking into consideration why policies will and have failed.

Apr 2 2024

The Arrogance of Politicians

Posted originally on Apr 1, 2024 by Martin Armstrong

Mar 30 2024

Tucker Carlson and Mike Rowe Discuss AI

Posted originally on the CTH on March 29, 2024 | Sundance

For his recent episode, Tucker Carlson revisits a former guest, Mike Rowe. Mr. Rowe has good and humorous sense of curiosity about things, about stuff, about the real world around us, and he provides good context for examination of this pretending world that swirls our orbit at a speed greater than we can grasp.

Toward the end of this segment, Rowe is asked the oft familiar question, “Where does all this go,” and his answer opens the door to other avenues I happen to agree with. WATCH:

In response to the ‘where does all this end’ question, Rowe notes that at a certain point everything becomes personal, and in the larger context all outcomes have to manifest in reality. I concur with Rowe on many levels, and a great example of that esoteric -v- reality position can be found all around us in the sphere of geopolitics and manipulation.

Think about the White House and State Dept message at the very beginning of Russia’s military operation in Eastern Ukraine. Do you remember the White House briefing when questioned about “where this will end”? {Background}

Deputy National Security Advisor and Deputy Director of the National Economic Council, Daleep Singh, was presented at the podium on the day of Russia’s first moves into Ukraine, to explain the strategic policy of the Biden administration toward Russia.

…”Ultimately, the goal of our sanctions is to make this a strategic failure for Russia; and let’s define a little bit of what that means. Strategic success in the 21st century is not about a physical land grab of territory; that’s what Putin has done. In this century, strategic power is increasingly measured and exercised by economic strength, by technological sophistication and your story – who you are, what your values are; can you attract ideas and talent and goodwill? And on each of those measures, this will be a failure for Russia.” (Video Link)

What Daleep Singh said was essentially that Biden policy toward Russia boiled down geopolitical power to a cultural issue of social likeability.

President Putin was also asked about NATO’s likely response, and his reply was more akin to ‘What is the West going to do, put tanks in the forest’?

The disparity between the Biden response and the Putin response can be looked at as esoteric vs realist.

At a certain point in the real world, if you want to change something, you have to physically act upon it.

NATO could gnash their teeth, try to diminish the Russian economy from the sanction approach, and shout at the diplomatic corps. However, so long as words were the answer, the physical reality of the situation would never change. This was the baseline for Putin’s confidence.

The same thing can be said for this collective Western effort to financially control all the citizens within the region. At a certain point the talk becomes action, and that action then creates an outcome.

Mike Tyson famously said, “Everyone has a plan, until they get punched in the face.” The same may be true for the plans and schemes of the globalists.

Can the triggering of their plan be stopped? I think that’s arguably, doubtful; people are just complacent. However, in the outcome phase, will the consequences of that globalist plan be accepted? That’s where I’m cautiously more optimistic the people impacted will punch the globalists in the mouth.

I’m not sure we can vote our way out of this in advance, but I am more confident we can punch our way to victory.

Additionally, if you look at what the globalists are doing, punch-avoidance-planning is consuming a lot of their time.

The need for control is a reaction to fear.

Mar 26 2024

The US Government’s Plan for Social Security

Posted originally on Mar 26, 2024 By Martin Armstrong

When questioned about the future of Social Security by the Senate Finance Committee, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen admitted that Biden “doesn’t have a plan.” There could be no possible plan for an ongoing Ponzi scheme that will fail once the fund runs out of money.

Estimates believe Social Security will reach insolvency before 2034. “I don’t have that computation to offer you,” before saying, “The president doesn’t have a plan. He has principles.” Principles do not put food on the table.

Of course, lawmakers immediately look at raising our taxes. “I’ll note that there’s already been $4.9 trillion in new taxes proposed for those making over $400,000 a year. It seems to be the go-to place, fill in the blank, we’re going to tax those over $400,000 a year for whatever,” Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., told Yellen. “Of that $4.9 trillion, none of that has been dedicated to Social Security.” We are raising taxes to fund extravagant climate change packages and wars. None of the money we give to our government goes back into the community.

The likelihood of Social Security remaining as it is today is ZERO. There is more likely to be a huge split in interest rates from the private sector compared to the public at the federal level.

As I have stated before, I donated my time to work with Congress back in the ’90s in an attempt to reform Social Security, transforming it into a wealth fund that was allocated out among managers. I was even shuttling between the Chairman of the House Ways & Means Committee, Bill Archer, and the House Majority Leader Dick Army. I argued for the privatization of Social Security to allow it to become a wealth fund and allow it to invest in equities. The Democrats would not vote for it, so this is why Social Security today cannot survive. Social Security invests 100% in government bonds, meaning it does not even earn a fair interest rate.

The Democrats painted this private investment as “risky,” and they voted against it. So, Social Security invests 100% in government bonds. Let’s see. The Fed lowered the interest rates to “stimulate” the economy. The net effect is that Social Security is simply a slush fund with no possible economic growth. The loss has come at the “opportunity risk” of leaving the money in bonds.

I laid out the structure for allocating money according to the track record of the manager. I was doing this because I had no interest in managing money of this nature. The Democrats wanted to replace the fund managers at will when they retook the majority. I explained that this decision should not be political. I did not care if the fund manager voted Democrat or Republican. That just never sunk in. Had Social Security simply become a wealth fund as so many nations around the world have adopted, it would NOT be in danger of a financial crisis today.

Now, I do not believe they will stop paying Social Security, but they could reduce payments and continue raising the age at which recipients may receive benefits, especially since the average life expectancy for Americans is on the decline. Take Venezuela for example. They honor their pensions, but what you get today will buy only a cup of coffee. Yet another major government-created crisis that could have been avoided.

Mar 25 2024

Finally – House Subcommittee Chairman Pete Sessions Starts Looking at Root of DC Lawfare Activity

Posted originally on the CTH on March 24, 2024 | Sundance

Representative Pete Sessions is Chairman of the Subcommittee for Govt Operations and the Federal Workforce within the House Oversight and Government Accountability Committee. The subcommittee has a few key Republican representatives, including Clay Higgins and Byron Donalds, who are aligned with MAGA, Donald Trump, pushback against the weaponization of our modern UniParty government – and they appear as allies in the effort to stimulate a larger awakening amid the American electorate.

As readers here are very aware, I am exceptionally frustrated with the willful blindness that permeates most of our Republican representatives. The GOP reps ignore the root causes of the problems and choose to focus on the politics of narratives. As a result, congressional hearings, soundbites, letters written etc. generate nothing that stops the weaponization of govt. Quite simply, there are specific people within the administrative state that are the core of the corrupt activity.

These deep DC embeds, bureaucrats within a system behind the politicians, are never identified, called out or held accountable by the politicians or political staff who assist the elected representatives. This is a big problem, and their willful blindness creates an outcome where the corrupt status quo continues despite grand pontifications and sternly worded letters intended to satiate the victims – We The People.

The current status is as if the politicians are afraid of the IC-assisted bureaucrats within it. This reality creates the frustration that most people feel, yet few can accurately identify. However, if we can get a few politicians to accurately identify and target some very specific and corrupt people within the deep state, then we begin a process where the weeds of corruption begin getting pulled out by their roots.

Chairman Pete Sessions (TX-CD17) appears to have taken the first step in what could be a very lengthy process of sunlight. Chairman Sessions has sent a preservation letter to Georgetown University School of Law, identifying a couple of people at the root of the problem, Rosa Brooks and Mary McCord. {SEE HERE}

RED STATE – […] Sessions specifically singled out Professor Mary B. McCord for Brooks’ attention. McCord is now the executive director of the Georgetown University School of Law’s Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protections, or ICAP.

Just as Brooks is no utility player, neither is McCord.

Before McCord joined Brooks’ team at Georgetown, she was a holdover from President Barack Obama, serving in the early months of the Trump administration.

As the acting assistant attorney general for the National Security Division, McCord worked with another Obama holdover, acting Attorney General Sally Q. Yates, worked together to kneecap National Security Advisor Michael T. Flynn.

The subcommittee chairman quoted McCord in the letter from an interview she gave to NBC News, in its Jan. 14 web article, “Fears grow that Trump will use the military in ‘dictatorial ways’ if he returns to the White House.”

McCord told NBC: “We’re already starting to put together a team to think through the most damaging types of things that he [Trump] might do so that we’re ready to bring lawsuits if we have to.”

The congressman then made a request:

Please define if Professor McCord and her colleagues are conducting this hyperpartisan activity under the auspices of ICAP—an entity which is described as a ‘non-partisan institute within Georgetown University Law Center.

(continue reading).

While both Brooks and McCord are key players within a corrupt network, it is Mary McCord who can be directly traced to the origin of every attack against President Donald Trump and his administration.

There is not a single element of the Lawfare construct targeting Donald Trump that does not trace in origination back to Mary McCord.

To give you an idea of the scope of influence of Mary McCord as a key functionary, consider what we can document.

♦ McCord submitted the fraudulent FISA application to spy on Trump campaign (2016).

♦ McCord created the “Logan Act” claim used against Michael Flynn and then went with Sally Yates to confront the White House (2017).

♦ McCord then left the DOJ and went to work for Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler on their impeachment teams (2018).

♦ McCord organized the CIA rule changes with Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson. [Atkinson was McCord’s general counsel when she was acting head of the DOJ-National Security Division.] That 2019 coordination, with her former colleague, created the baseline for the false claims of National Security Council member Alexander Vindman and the Ukraine-narrative impeachment effort.

♦ McCord led and organized the House joint committee impeachment effort, in the background, using the evidence she helped create (2019).

♦ McCord joined the FISA Court to protect against DOJ IG Michael Horowitz’s newly gained NSD oversight and his review of the Title-1 surveillance warrant – the FISA that targeted Carter Page. A FISA warrant McCord originally constructed and submitted to the FISA court a few years earlier (2019).

♦ McCord then joined the J6 Committee helping to create all the Lawfare angles they deployed (2021).

November 3, 2021 – In Washington DC – “Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) and the House Jan. 6 Select Committee has tapped Mary McCord, who once ran the Justice Department’s National Security Division, for representation in its fight to obtain former President Donald Trump’s White House records. (read more)

♦ McCord then coordinated with DA Fani Willis in Georgia (2022).

January 10, 2024 – Georgia prosecutors probing Donald Trump’s effort to subvert the 2020 election got an early boost in the spring of 2022. It came from another set of investigators who were way ahead of them: the House Jan. 6 select committee.

Committee staff quietly met with lawyers and agents working for Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis in mid-April 2022, just as she prepared to convene a special grand jury investigation. In the previously unreported meeting, the Jan. 6 committee aides let the district attorney’s team review — but not keep — a limited set of evidence they had gathered. (read more)

♦ McCord is working with Special Counsel Jack Smith to prosecute Trump (2023 through today).

In short, Mary McCord is the Lawfare string that winds through every legal ‘stop Trump’ effort; yet, until now no one has ever called her out!

January 2024 – […] “We’re already starting to put together a team to think through the most damaging types of things that he [Trump] might do so that we’re ready to bring lawsuits if we have to,” said Mary McCord, executive director of the Institution for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at Georgetown Law.

Part of the aim is to identify like-minded organizations and create a coalition to challenge Trump from day one, those taking part in the discussions said. Some participants are combing through policy papers being crafted for a future conservative administration. They’re also watching the interviews that Trump allies are giving to the press for clues to how a Trump sequel would look. (more)

Mar 20 2024

The Great Misconception of AI

Posted originally on Mar 20, 2024 By Martin Armstrong

AI is a hot topic for regulators. Regulators and most companies that offer purported AI are clueless about what constitutes actual AI. Way too many charlatans are out there calling a simple trend-following program AI. They create some rules, and the program just follows what they created. That is NOT Artificial Intelligence.

The SEC is all over this and has already been targeting purported AI companies that call their programs AI when they have a simple buy-sell analogy that may trade-off for an Elliot Wave or Stochastic with inherent BIAS created by their predetermined rule. Any system that has an inherent BIAS is not actually AI.

Yes, Bill Gates predicts that artificial intelligence will transform the world in just five years. The International Monetary Fund predicts that the rise of AI could affect about 40% of jobs around the world. When I went to engineering school, we had to learn both programming and hardware. Back then, StarTrek was on TV and that was the inspiration of everyone in the industry to create a computer that was capable of understanding and running the ship. Even Steve Jobs’s inspiration behind Apple and the iPad came from the visions we had from StarTrek.

I worked with Dragon System back in the eighties when it was hardware you put into a slot in an IBM XT. It would allow the computer to talk. My daughter was fascinated by it. I wrote a program just to be able to hold a conversation with her and taught it how to be a politician. If it ventured into an area it did not know, it would just change the subject. I still remember she came home from school one day, and I had the computer apart, and she began crying that I had killed it. I used my kids to teach me how to write natural language so it would understand the words in a conversation. The good old days.

There is a lot of misguided hope surrounding Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning. All we need to do is look objectively at IBM project WATSON. Just over a decade ago, artificial intelligence (AI) made one of its showier forays into the public’s consciousness when IBM’s Watson computer appeared on the American quiz show Jeopardy. Watson’s debut performance against two of the show’s most successful contestants was televised to a national viewership across three evenings. In the end, the machine triumphed comfortably.

This was NOT actually AI. It is what I call a look-up program. Even ChatGPT is not capable of actually achieving independent thought. They can understand and go fetch the answer faster than a human. The people I knew back then thought Watson would one day cure cancer. None of that was possible because they fooled themselves about AI.

Most of AI’s dangers are caused by its failure to comprehend what it is capable of doing—especially in trading. This all stems from the distorted idea that our brains are supercomputers and there is no God, for our consciousness is simply created by throwing in a bunch of data, shaking well, and out comes a person. Thus, the thrust to mimic the brain led to the creation of neural nets. But that effort also failed in actually creating original thought.

I bought my first Roman coin, which came when I was perhaps 10 to 13 years old, for $10. It was in the 3rd century when Rome debased its currency. The coin was from Emperor Aurelian (270-275AD). I noticed that what once was silver coins was bronze, but they used a chemical process to bring 20% silver to the surface to make them look like silver coins when first issued. I saw the same thing in our coins in 1965, issuing clad coinage with a copper center and nickel surface, doing the same as the Romans.

Roman decline silver content monetary system Armstrong Waterfall effect

I was fascinated with the parallel and realized that if I collected the coinage annually, I could see just how fast Rome fell. We all knew Rome fell, but nobody even determined how fast Rome fell. I used the coinage to plot that out. Many people have copied that chart, but you could not make it without testing the coinage.

I also wrote about when I was in 9th grade; my history teacher brought in an old black-and-white movie named Toast of New York. It was about Jim Fisk and his attempt to corner the gold market that created the Panic of 1869. In that movie, he is looking at the ticker tape quoting gold just hit $162. Because I had a part-time job in a coin/bullion store, I knew the price of gold was $35. Suddenly, what I was being taught in school was wrong. Nothing was linear. It was always a business cycle, for how else could gold be $162 in 1869 and $35 postwar up to 1971?

First of all, this idea that our brains are supercomputers and consciousness is simply a matter of throwing a bunch of data in and out comes consciousness is totally nonsense. A baby knows nothing when born but displays consciousness. My dogs are self-aware. They bark at another dog but put a mirror down, knowing it is themselves. The little one, Josephine, was sick and lying down. I gave Napoleon a treat, and she took it over and gave it to Josephine. I was stunned. They, too, have a consciousness that exists, and it did not come from throwing in a bunch of data.

Any program based on this idea of Machine Language and somehow it will figure out how to trade all by itself is totally absurd. IBM thought Watson could discover the cure for cancer – it did not. As was reported:

“But three years after IBM began selling Watson to recommend the best cancer treatments to doctors around the world, a STAT investigation has found that the supercomputer isn’t living up to the lofty expectations IBM created for it. It is still struggling with the basic step of learning about different forms of cancer. “

Why Machine Learning Has Failed

The entire premise that there is no God and consciousness is achieved by merely throwing in a bunch of data and shaking well has proven to be absolute NONSENSE. The next machine learning program cannot learn to be a doctor any more than it can become a trader. There is something a lot more to this thing we call consciousness. It will NEVER simply emerge from the data – PERIOD!

You cannot create a machine-learning program and expect it to teach you how to trade, cure cancer, or drive a car. I have raced cars. I have driven almost every sort, even a Formula One—NOT professionally in a Formula One. When you are driving, you have to look at everyone around you. You look for the slightest move, which indicates what that driver is thinking. This is that undefinable gut feeling. You cannot code this, and I have been coding AI since the 1970s.

This is why a self-driving car with AI will not really work. It was a grand theory, but there is no possible way you can expect AI to make intuitive judgment decisions – a gut feeling. This is the problem with expecting that AI will replace humans, where it requires a gut feeling.

Therein lies the problem. This expectation that AI can replace human judgment is just fiction. I can mimic emotions on a computer. If you use insulting words, it can hurl an insult back at you. I cannot create actual emotion, nor can I create judgment from a Sixth Sense. This idea that you create a black box, throw in a bunch of data, and out comes an artificial person is absurd.

Someone sent this in when they asked ChapGPT about the difference between it and Socrates. It can look that up and put out the information. It cannot trade any more than it could drive a car. AI will never achieve that human judgment.

To create Socrates, I realized that it could not be a neural net nor a black box where you hope, like IBM, it will figure it all out and somehow emerge as the best trader in history. I taught Socrates how I would look at the world as an international hedge fund manager, comparing everything and looking at the capital flows. You cannot forecast gold in isolation any more than the stock market. EVERYTHING is connected. As I have often said, the US was bankrupt in 1896, and JP Morgan arranged a $100 million gold loan to bail out the country. Without World Wars I & II, the US would never have become the world’s financial capital. Obviously, you cannot forecast the US share market by just looking at the Fed.

While I taught Socrates how to analyze, I created no hard rules like interest rates up and stocks down. Such market beliefs are in themselves fiction. The Fed was raising rates when Trump came to power, and the market rallied, but they called it the Trump Rally. The Romans used olive oil for heat and light. That was replaced with whale oil, which was then replaced by crude oil. Justinian I (527-565AD) issued the first Clean Air Act in 535AD. He proclaimed the importance of clean air as a birthright. “By the law of nature these things are common to mankind—the air, running water, the sea.”