Well, well, well…. everything Joe Biden and the Obama administration previously denied taking place is now documented as having taken place. Newly discovered emails between Ukrainian energy company Burisma and State Dept. officials show the company was leveraging Biden’s affiliation with the company to get U.S. govt assistance.
As a result of a FOIA lawsuit journalist John Solomon has received emails between the Burisma energy company and U.S. State Department; where Burisma seeking U.S. government assistance to get the Ukraine prosecutor to drop a corruption probe against the energy co., and leveraging Hunter Biden’s board membership toward their efforts.
This is the evidence the media said didn’t exist:
The eventual outcome was Vice-President Joe Biden threatening to withhold $1 billion in U.S. financial aid to Ukraine if the Ukrainian government did not fire the prosecutor and drop their investigation of Burisma. Ukraine fired the prosecutor and dropped the investigation. [Full Solomon Article Here]
Marie Harf unavailable for comment….
Armstrong Economics Blog/Opinion
Re-Posted Nov 1, 2019 by Martin Armstrong
I want to thank everyone for the birthday greetings and wishes. The fact that the Supreme Court has accepted my petition and ordered the government to respond on the eve of my birthday, was the greatest gift I could ever ask for. This should help a lot of people who are being robbed of all constitutional rights by the SEC and CFTC. They really have to eliminate immunity for government lawyers. Until that takes place, they will continue to abuse the law and use it as a political weapon against anyone who resists their tyranny.
Julian Assange will NEVER receive a fair trial. This is the problem when the law can be used as a political weapon just as Congress is doing to Trump right now – except they are making law as they go, which will no doubt also end up in the Supreme Court.
Armstrong Economics Blog/Rule of Law
Posted Nov 1, 2019 by Martin Armstrong
At the World Economic Conference, I announced that I had petitioned the Supreme Court after discovering in 2017 that despite the fact that the old company Princeton Economics International Ltd (PEI) had been closed back in 2009, the receivership was covertly continuing without my knowledge taking fees no less. How can a judge approve fees for 20 years when the bank pled guilty and repaid everyone back in 2002?
The Receiver, Alan Cohen, had been running PEI from inside Goldman Sachs. My objections that this was a conflict of interest were always ignored. Only because Cohen left Goldman Sachs and became one of the top people in the SEC to ensure various legislation, he could no longer pretend to be the “impartial receiver”.
The SEC had even filed a letter when the Receiver sought to stop the domestic company from publishing research and to fire all the staff. They pointed out that receivers were not allowed to liquidate companies but they pointed out that the company was not bankrupt and there was plenty of money. They have bled those assets dry for 20 years.
This merely illustrates the problem with New York. When I asked a New York Lawyer why no banks are ever charged in New York even when they blow up the entire world economy, he merely smiled and laughed. His response: “You don’t shit where you eat!” The problem with that is the image of the United States has been tarnished greatly. How can you deal with any bank in New York City if there is no rule of law because the courts protect the bankers?
Suddenly, I received a notice that the receivership was to be shut down in 2017. To my complete shock, all my original research and library, which was supposed to have been returned to me, was still in storage. The government REFUSED to return my material despite a prior court order that stated even the SEC was supposed to assist me to get all my personal material back. They just REFUSED to comply.
The Supreme Court has made several rulings bluntly ruling that what was done to me was illegal when carried out by a single court. In my case, they actually used a parallel court to invade the other and strip my lawyers to prevent any sort of a trial. They have been milking the excess funds in the receivership for 20 years. To hide the profits on currency, instead of compelling the bank to return the money they illegally had taken, the receiver sold the notes to HSBC who then redeemed them having to pay only $606 million due to the change in the Japanese yen pocketing nearly $400 million in profits as part of HSBC’s Criminal Restitution. Only when HSBC had to pay the criminal restitution did the government correctly inform the court the transactions were in yen and not dollars as they had told the press in my case. They always count on the press just repeating whatever they say and the press NEVER investigates or ever questions what the government prosecutors ever do. That is why they abuse the law for political gain because the press looks the other way and does not do its job.
As the petition outlines, virtually every other circuit outside of New York has honored the Supreme Court’s prior rulings and outlawed what was done to me plain and simple. New York has refused to recognize any rights that are honored in every other court in the country.
The Supreme Court has ORDERED the government to respond by December 2nd. This is the first step to be granted Cert. The Government has been ordered to respond to which they will no doubt request an extension. The last time I was in the Supreme Court, after ordering the government to respond, they suddenly released me from contempt and told the Supreme Court the case was then moot. This is EXTREMELY RARE to get into the Supreme Court even once, no less twice. I know of only one other time where the same case got to the Supreme Court twice and that was back in the 1950s.
If the Supreme Court grants cert this time, we are looking at a major case that will most likely vacate the rulings and hold that since it is illegal for a single court to strip you of your lawyers, then it will be illegal to use a parallel court to invade another court and do what it itself cannot do.
With respect to being held in contempt for $1.3 million for English and Scottish coins, I could not find, even that has come up with a new twist. The Judge held me in contempt saying he did not believe me claiming he thought I knew where they were. I had clients willing to put up the $1.3 million in cash for bail and he denied bail. To be held for $1.3 million on a billion-dollar case was .0013%. That was absurd, but they had to prevent a trial. There was no way they would allow a trial after the bank had taken the money. I had no restitution and the bank simply repaid the money. The contempt statute for civil contempt is 18 months. Judge Richard Owen kept rolling the contempt every 18 months and kept me there for nearly 7 years without any trial. Despite all of these facts, nobody in the mainstream press would ever report the truth and always supported the government no matter how outrageous they acted.
To be held in contempt, you are supposed to be given an order which specifically states what it is you are to produce to regain your liberty. I stood up in court and asked where is this order. The receiver Alan Cohen admitted he never produced one and said he would take photos of what he found and I could make the list of what was missing from prison. Naturally, he never even provided any photos either.
The coins I could never produce turned out up when a dealer in Philadelphia had bought the missing coins for $6,000 in cash. They tried to sell them through an auction house in Texas. Perhaps they had no idea that the receivership was still going for 20 years. This is the same firm that had been involved in trying to sell the stolen 1933 $20 gold coins from the US Mint in Philadelphia, which the Court of Appeals ruled that they were the property of the US government all along.
Phase II will be the Supreme Court should grant Cert after the government responds and they will probably hear the case in the Spring of 2020.
Armstrong Economics Blog/Corruption
Re-Posted Oct 30, 2019 by Martin Armstrong
With all due respect I think you are not being fair on the question of earning or not a lot of money. First of all there LOTS of people that earn a lot of money with corruption or just because they were lucky or through family links have managed to get in privileged positions.
Secondly, I have a PhD in maths and decided to dedicate my life to both teaching and doing research in academia and 20 years on I am earning less and got nowhere in the academia career from the point where I started: the bottom.
And speaking of truck drivers, they earn more than young physicians and in neighbouring Spain they earn a lot more than I do.
Greetings from Portugal (the miracle of Europe, so they say in Brussels!)
ANSWER: I fully appreciate your perspective. Where you are perhaps too focused is on lumping all people with any wealth into a narrow category. That is like saying everyone who does not have wealth is on welfare. The categories of wealth you have mentioned are corruption and links to family. This typically involves politics. There are people who inherit money from their parents or have inherited a business. Typically, they say the first generation makes it, the second generation diminishes it, and third generation wipes it out.
This is why I believe we need to end career politicians and implement one-term limits to help reduce corruption. But additionally, there should be no income tax and that will go a great way to end bribing politicians for special treatment. At worst, there should be a flat tax which would also tend to end that. The rest of the corruption is centered on lobbying for regulation exceptions.
What you are experiencing is in truth taking place to all wage earners. The rise in taxation has been dramatic postwar and that has reduced the standard of living. On top of that, there is systemic inflation. Whatever they took from you for a pension 20 years ago is by no means the same today. This is how life insurance companies make their money. They sell you a policy today that is one million euros. But in 20 years, one million euros will buy a fraction of what it does today. I bought a Porsche in 1970 for $10,000. You cannot even buy a used one for that today. The purchasing power of the money routinely declines. People from Venezuela are being paid their pensions. They cannot even buy a cup of coffee today. This is the systemic corruption propagated by government overtime even if they never intended it to work out that way.