Tag Archives: Hunt for Taxes

Sep 4 2017

ECB – Draghi & Tapering


Armstrong Economics Blog/Central Banks

Re-Posted Sep 4, 2017 by Martin Armstrong

The European Central Bank (ECB) is expected to begin reducing its bond purchases gradually tampering its stimulation program of Quantitative Easing (QE). Nevertheless, reliable sources tell of the ECB being extremely cautious fearing what will happen if buyers do not appear and rates begin to rise sharply. The difference between the ECB and the Fed is stark. The ECB owns 40% of Eurozone government debt. The Fed does not even come close.

Obviously, the European financial markets have become addicted to the unprecedented inflow of cheap money even though there has been no appreciable rise in economic growth or inflation as was expected. This raises the question only asked behind the curtain: Will the economy spiral downward if QE ends? The Fed never reached the levels of ECB’s QE program so there is no comparison with the States.

The ECB expects to gradually lower the constant QE purchases of government debt in the Eurozone, which has really kept the governments on life-support. In part, this is why Macron is pushing to federalize Europe in its budgetary and financial markets. There is a fear that there will be severe distortions on the exchanges in the months ahead. What is hoped is that the Euro will decline and make the difficult weaning more tolerable by increasing exports and creating inflation. A lower currency will help to stimulate the Eurozone whereas a rising currency will only add to the deflationary pressures.

The ECB will most likely allow bonds to simply mature rather than sell them back to the marketplace. Any news of the ECB actually selling bonds would send a wave of panic through the European markets. Thus, the only practical way to approach this is to (1) reduce purchases and (2) allow current holding to mature and hopefully they money will be reinvested by the private sector. Accordingly, allowing bonds to simply mature and not the ECB will not reinvest, will eventually lead not to a meltdown of bond purchases but and transfer of buying to the private sector. This wonderful scenario of private reinvestments will not take place at current interest rate levels. It is more likely that the ECB will be compelled to continue to be a major player in the Eurozone bond market for many years to come. They are more likely than not trapped and unable to escape from this life-support system without grave consequences.

The central bank itself, however, is covered by how it reinvests the money from maturing papers. The ECB announced that it would be flexible and as long as necessary. European analysts predict that the majority of funds from matured securities will flow into federal bonds. They hope that Italian and French government securities will also benefit. The ECB has been buying government bonds and other securities on a large scale since March 2015. The purchases of public debt securities were with maturities of two to thirty years. The total program has now amounted to €2.28 trillion.

Draghi has put off any discussion until this month’s meeting at best. The ECB will proceed as slowly as possible. The ECB is expected to reduce its monthly purchases from  €60 billion to €40 billion in 2018, but it will most likely avoid any definitive target leaving it open for fear of market disruptions. His June 2017 speech that the ECB could possibly go a less expansive course because of economic recovery, sent the markets down, not up. The DAX peaked in June with Draghi’s first statement on reversing QE. That result was painful and Draghi has been criticized behind the curtain.

Sep 4 2017

Scandal of Selling Insurance on Products, Mortgages & Loans


Armstrong Economics Blog/Banking Crisis

Re-Posted Sep 4, 2017 by Martin Armstrong

One of the biggest rackets contributing to digging a deeper hole of economic decline in growth since the 1990s has been the insurance protection scam. When you go to a store they offer you protection on whatever you buy. The profits on these deals is exceedingly high. In many cases, computers or a TV has some warranty and they are just getting you pay for something you already have.

In Britain, this has become known as the PPI Scandal. They were selling you insurance that if something happened they would pay your mortgage payment. PPI policies were being sold since the 1990s on mortgages, and loans and credit cards. They were supposed to repay people’s borrowings if their income fell because they became ill or lost their jobs. In reality, their payout was just 15% according to the Guardian. The British courts have ruled against the bankers and insurance companies and they have to repay billions of pounds.

Selling such insurance has been outrageous exploiting consumers and reducing disposable income that has contributed to the lower economic growth in recent years. In the States, add the ballooning healthcare costs under Obamacare and the average person has little left after basic living expenses. This is resulting in fewer marriages, declining birth rates, and children still living with their parents well into their 30s.

It is time to clean up the insurance scam in every aspect.

Sep 4 2017

WHY are banks Too Big to Fail & Too Big To Jail


Armstrong Economics Blog/Corruption

Re-Posted Sep 4, 2017 by Martin Armstrong

There is something much more sinister going on behind the curtain. I have warned that you really are taking your life in your hands doing business in New York City with a bank because NOBODY ever wins against the bankers no matter what they do. This begs the question about why are banks paying huge fines, yet nobody goes to jail, and there is never a trial while class action suits are summarily dismissed? Something is seriously wrong here. To discover the answer, as always, just follow the money!

Back in 2003, Judge Milton Pollack dismissed two class action suits against Merrill Lynch for putting out bogus research during the DOT.COM Bubble after the investment bank plead guilty and paid huge fines. Judge Pollack wrote a 43 page decision protecting banks even when they produce intentional fake research. The judge said that investors were eager to take that risk and were to blame for their own losses. Pollack then dismissed another 25 lawsuits against the bankers. Similarly, another judge dismissed suits against Credit Suisse First Boston, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley. Why is it impossible to sue the bankers in America where justice is supposed to exist for all?

So why are the banks paying huge fines but then nobody can sue them? An inside source coming from a lawyer who worked internally at a bank, explained that the New York Attorney General simply walks into his office and informs them they will hand over $1.2 billion in fines and he does not care about defenses or the rule of law. It is plain criminal extortion.  The bankers pay these fines because they cannot afford to go to trial and lose for then class action lawsuits from depositors and shareholders will bury the institution. So the judges are in on the scam and class action lawsuits are dismissed with absurd reasoning and the government makes billions in the process. Hence this corruption (1) leads to too big to jail and (2) it merely encourages bankers to do whatever they desire knowing they will pay a small percentage of what they make.

Who pays for all these fines? I was told they simply set aside an amount for what is called “protection” money just like dealing with the Mafia. The bankers raise fees to fund these so the consumer is the one paying for these huge fines not really even the shareholders. It is indeed organized crime at the government level.

Sep 3 2017

Two Seismic Events In North Korea are a Suspected Nuclear Test – Possibly: One Explosion, One Collapse…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on September 3, 2017 by

Two seismic events happening in North Korea are suspected to be a nuclear test.  The first event was reportedly measured at a 5.6 Richter Scale magnitude. The second event is being reported at 6.3.  Both seismic events are potentially related to a nuclear detonation:

SEOUL (Reuters) – An earthquake 5.6 was recorded on Sunday in North Korea near the country’s known nuclear test site Punggye-ri, Yonhap news agency reported, citing South Korea’s meteorological agency.

The quake appeared to have been man-made, Yonhap quoted the agency as saying, suggesting the isolated country had conducted a sixth nuclear test. (read more)

(Via CNBC) KCNA via KNS | Associated Press –  North Korea was struck by strong tremors on Sunday, with the South’s officials saying it could be due to a nuclear test.

The USGS initially reported the first tremor as a 5.6 magnitude, but later raised it to 6.3, while China’s earthquake administration said it detected a 6.3 magnitude earthquake in Northeastern North Korea, calling it a “suspected explosion,” Reuters reported.

The depth of the first quake was recorded as zero kilometers, the China earthquake administration said, according to Reuters.

The report cited the USGS as saying the first tremor occurred at around 12 noon North Korea time.

China’s earthquake administration later said it detected a second quake of magnitude 4.6 at a depth of zero kilometers, which it called a “collapse,” Reuters reported, noting the second tremor came eight minutes after the first at nearly identical coordinates.

A South Korean military official told NBC News that the first quake was artificial, while Yonhap reported the military said the first tremor was located near the North’s nuclear test site.

South Korea’s Blue House, the country’s equivalent of the White House, said that the North may conducted another nuclear test, its sixth, the South’s official news agency Yonhap reported.

The South’s President Moon Jae-in has called a National Security Council meeting, while the country’s military raised its alert level, Yonhap reported.

Previous tremors in the reclusive country have been caused by nuclear tests. The wave form signal for an explosion and an earthquake are different, allowing geologists to distinguish a man-made tremor.  (read more)

Sep 3 2017

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals – Equity v Law


Armstrong Economics Blog/Rule of Law

Re-Posted Sep 3, 2017 by Martin Armstrong

Many people have written in on both sides of the issue concerning the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA. Some totally disagree with me and cite that the law is the law. But there is a historical problem with the rule of law – there are times when the rule of law is unjust. For example, if someone tried to kill you and you defended yourself and killed them, are you a murderer because you killed someone by the strict interpretation of the law?

King’s Bench

Historically, there were two courts in England – the King’s Bench and Chancery. In modern practice, the biggest mistake the Founding Fathers made in the United States was to merge the two into the same court. That is what has given judges unbridled discretion to tear up the constitution any time they desire relying on the ancient powers of Chancery rather than the rule of law.

There is a clear distinction between someone who was brought here as a small child, grew up here, married, and had children with an American and a child sent across the border on their own. The deportation of the former would be a injustice not merely to the child who grew up here and is unfamiliar with the customs of his parent’s origins no less their own children here who are Americans depriving them of a parent. The deportation of the latter would not be an injustice.

Court of Chancery

The most important distinction between law (King’s Bench) and equity, which was administered by the Court of Chancery,  is the set of remedies each offers. The most common civil remedy a court of law can award is monetary damages. Equity, however, enters injunctions or decrees directing someone either to act or to forbear from acting. By the 14th century, the English Court of  Chancery was affording remedies where the strict procedures of the common law worked injustice or could not provide a remedy to a deserving petitioner. The writ of Habeas Corpus was equity – not law. The judges or Chancellors presiding in Chancery were often theological in background yet were also knowledgeable of Roman law and canon law. Over time, a body of rules emerged but they varied from Chancellor to Chancellor and they tended to become more fixed only during the 17th century. The became the system of precedent much like its common-law cousin.

The Court of Chancery assumed a vital role in many areas from false or unjust imprisonment to establishing a framework that the common law could not accommodate. This role gave rise to the basic distinction between legal and equitable interests. However, when one hands discretion to any judge, the net result is always, and without exception, the progression of corruption. By the 19th century, the Court of Chancery was hopelessly corrupt and as such, so was the United States Federal courts because the Founding Fathers merely this discretion with the rule of law and as such there can be no rule of law that is consistent in the United States.

The distinction of a child who grew up here and married an American and one that was recently pushed across the border is of tremendous importance. To deport the former will deprive children of their parent. This is what Chancery was for at the beginning. Unfortunately, we no longer have a court of real chancery nor do we have a court of law. The federal Judiciary is a corrupt system incapable of honoring either the law or equity.

In 1853, Bleak House was written by Charles Dickens, in which he describes how corrupt Chancery became during the 19th century. He concluded, “Suffer any wrong that can be done you rather than come here!” That was a sad statement of what had become of honor, dignity, and justice. We have reached that same point in American history where there is nothing left.

” On such an afternoon some score of members of the High Court of Chancery bar ought to be–as here they are–mistily engaged in one of the ten thousand stages of an endless cause, tripping one another up on slippery precedents, groping knee-deep in technicalities, running their goat-hair and horsehair warded heads against walls of words and making a pretence of equity with serious faces, as players might. …  This is the Court of Chancery, which has its decaying houses and its blighted lands in every shire, which has its worn-out lunatic in every madhouse and its dead in every churchyard, which has its ruined suitor with his slipshod heels and threadbare dress borrowing and begging through the round of every man’s acquaintance, which gives to monied might the means abundantly of wearying out the right, which so exhausts finances, patience, courage, hope, so overthrows the brain and breaks the heart, that there is not an honourable man among its practitioners who would not give–who does not often give–the warning, “Suffer any wrong that can be done you rather than come here!”

Sep 3 2017

Macron wants a Federal Budget for All of the Eurozone


Armstrong Economics Blog/European Union

Re-Posted Sep 3, 2017 by Martin Armstrong

French Prime Minister Emmanuel Macron is coming out arguing for the total federalization of Europe proposing that there should be a budget for the Eurozone of hundreds of billions of euros. Macron’s position is that this budget should represent several points of the gross domestic product (GDP) of the Eurozone. It should be possible, Macron said, to collect money together in the markets and “allocate it with sufficient force” for all.

He also has made it clear that the GDP of all euro area countries was €10.7 trillion in 2016 according to Eurostat. He makes it clear that the Eurozone is far too restrictive in its budget policy when compared with the policies of China, Russia or the United States. He has made it clear that this is the cause of the high unemployment in Europe among the youth.

France has very high unemployment as is the case in most Eurozone countries. The debt of the Eurozone countries has escalated and as in France there is a growing gap between expenditure and tax collection. Some fear that the creation of such a common euro budget will lead to even more government debt as countries pump out debt to try to stimulate their economies.

Macron is correct that there is a huge problem that is eating away at the Eurozone. The restrictive policies are because of Germany’s fear of inflation that they went through during the 1920s. They wrongly attribute inflation to the increase in money supply and ignore the fact that it was a collapse in confidence given the 1918 revolution led by Communists in Germany.

Macron wants to push forward with his proposals for a further development of the monetary union after the German Bundestag election. Merkel will certainly not entertain any such proposal before the election. Still, Macron is way off the mark. Increasing the spending and debt with rising taxes will still fail to reverse the economic decline. The Eurozone must be restructured or it cannot survive.

Sep 2 2017

DACA Timing – President Trump is Probing, Testing, Gauging, Timing for “The Big Ugly”…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on September 1, 2017 by

President Trump announced a decision on DACA will be Tuesday.  Will this finally begin the “Big Ugly” confrontation?  Possibly, but one thing is certain, right now he’s probing.

CTH is not a seer of Donald Trump, and anyone who would claim they are should be necessarily dismissed.  President Donald Trump is the only entity who knows specifically what he’s going to do in the moments leading up to what he’s going to do; no-one else.  However, that said, CTH does have a pretty good sense of what evaluation processes Trump takes prior to action.  There are indications Tuesday might be the day.

There is one political enterprise within Washington DC and national politics.  There is only one enterprise.  That enterprise is the UniParty.  There is only one political party in Washington DC, with two internal caucuses – Republicans and Democrats.

The “Big Ugly” is the moment when President Trump decides to rip the masks off the remnants of the Republican wing of the UniParty within Washington DC.  In many ways the “Big Ugly” is the elimination of the Republican party, and the beginning of an era when a second party, a MAGA party, actually enters the blood stream of U.S. politics and stands against the UniParty.

The confrontation is inevitable.  It has been inevitable since the entire GOPe apparatus, including every single GOPe candidate within the 2016 Republican primary, stood up against Donald J Trump.   Candidate Donald Trump held an entirely different series of campaign platform issues the Republican apparatus abhors.  That’s why he won, and they didn’t.

However, Since the 2016 victory, the UniParty has thrown everything they can in front of him to block any advancement of those policies and platform issues.  Every political tool in the Republican armory has been deployed to eliminate the threat Trump represents. Reminder:

President Trump gave them a budget that reduces a trillion in spending; the republicans in congress balked. They openly said reducing spending is not their goal. Those same republicans are now suing President Trump and trying to force the State Department to spend on USAID  and NGO’s. Those same republicans supported Omnibus spending bills. Those same republicans will not support removing ObamaCare. Those same republicans are fighting renegotiated trade deals. Those same republicans don’t support a border wall.  Those same republicans supported launching ridiculous Russian conspiracy investigations; and the list goes on, including senate republicans using a strategic maneuver to block their own President from recess appointments during their summer recess…

This is the behavior of opposition, UniParty opposition.  During the recent Arizona speech and MAGA rally, President Trump came closer than ever before to igniting the fuse on the Big Ugly.

Now, with President Obama’s unconstitutional DACA possibly being eliminated, we see yet another example of masks falling.  Republicans in opposition to DACA being removed. The signs are everywhere the Big Ugly confrontation is closer than ever.  It’s President Trump against a unified DC system.

Corporations (special interest groups) write laws.  Lobbyists take the law and go find politician(s) to support it.  Politicians get support from their peers using tenure and status etc.  Eventually, if things go according to norm, the legislation gets a vote.

Within every step of the process there are expense account lunches, dinners, trips, venue tickets and a host of other customary way-points to generate/leverage a successful outcome.

But the important part to remember is that the origination of the entire system is EXTERNAL to congress.

Congress does not write laws or legislation, special interest groups do.  Lobbyists are paid, some very well paid, to get politicians to go along with the need of the legislative group.

When you are voting for a Congressional Rep or a U.S. Senator you are not voting for a person who will write laws.  Your rep only votes on legislation to approve or disapprove of constructs that are written by outside groups and sold to them through lobbyists who work for those outside groups.

While all of this is happening the same outside groups who write the laws are providing money for the campaigns of the politicians they need to pass them.  This construct sets up the quid-pro-quo of influence, although much of it is fraught with plausible deniability.

This is the way legislation is created.

This is the reason why congress had ZERO legislation for President Trump’s platform.  There is no entity within Washington DC, republicans or democrats, who support the Trump agenda.  That’s why no legislation has advanced.  President Trump’s entire patriotic perspective on MAGAnomics, national security, and focus on “America-First” as a priority is adverse to Washington DC’s decades-long political and financial interests.

A confrontation to draw out this truth is needed.  That confrontation is “The Big Ugly”.   DACA is merely symptomatic as a potential trigger for the confrontation.  The federal budget, trade-deals, non-military global intervention, immigration enforcement, the border wall, etc. are all similar triggers.

With the repeal of DACA announcement, President Trump is probing for reaction to judge the timing.  His tweets and announcements are figurative recons probing into enemy encampments to judge their position, measure their strength, and gauge their response on various fronts.  It’s all about timing.

Ever since Donald Trump entered into politics there is a key element he knows he needs to keep at the forefront to succeed against the UniParty.  To continue succeeding Trump needs all of his adversaries, our adversaries, to drop their masks.

Donald Trump has done a remarkable job at drawing-out the enemy behind the wire.  No-one would argue they hold the same perspectives on the Republican apparatus, and the GOPe punditry, they previously held prior to Businessman Trump becoming Politician Trump.

As both a candidate and a president Donald Trump has exposed a jaw-dropping number of political deceivers. He’s also single-handily exposed their hidden agenda(s), and proved beyond a shadow’s doubt that Republican’s were lying about policy and principle for years.

When President Trump speaks, he’s always highlighting these issues. He is also speaking on these issues, repeatedly, to draw out the hidden truth and create a larger awakening.  It is really, really, important to see that Trump is always trying to engage that larger awakening.

This weekend he’s probing again.  Judging the UniParty and media response to his visit to Houston. Sensing their attack position. Measuring the severity of the opposition.  Always probing, always working on instinct.  Always aware of the need for the larger awakening.

If, following his probes this weekend, President Trump does decide to eliminate the President Obama DACA program, yes it will clearly indicate the Big Ugly has begun.  The reason is simply because of the predictable consequences.

With the elimination of DACA, the Republicans will strike down funding for the border wall.  The Republicans will demand immigration amnesty.  The Republicans will openly rebuke every principle of trade renegotiation.  The Republicans will hold the debt ceiling as hostage. The Republicans will force a presidential shut-down of government, etc. the list is long.

With all of that the Republicans will be fully unmasked; and with that unmasking the U.S. electorate will see that President Trump’s opposition is a UniParty of Paul Ryan joining with Nancy Pelosi, and Mitch McConnell joining with Chuck Schumer, and both Democrats and Republicans united against President Trump.

Just like it was during the 2016 GOP primary and general election, for the UniParty it will be a zero-sum game; and President Trump will, yet again, be one man against an entire corrupt political apparatus.

Sep 2 2017

Putin Warns We Are on the Verge of a Major Conflict


Armstrong Economics Blog/North Korea

Re-Posted Sep 2, 2017 by Martin Armstrong

Russian President Vladimir Putin warned on Friday writing in an article published on the Kremlin’s web site that the emerging standoff between North Korea and the United States over its nuclear missile program bringing the world to the edge of a large-scale conflict. He further warned that it was a mistake to try to pressure Pyongyang.

Putin will attend the summit of the BRICS nations in China next week. This article he posted was clearly taking a position ahead of his trip making it known that he favored negotiations with North Korea.  He wrote:

“It is essential to resolve the region’s problems through direct dialogue involving all sides without advancing any preconditions (for such talks).”

Sep 2 2017

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals


Armstrong Economics Blog/Rule of Law

Re-Posted Sep 2, 2017 by Martin Armstrong

President Donald Trump is about to make a decision that will mark his presidency forever. There are some 800,000 technically illegal aliens who came to the States as small children brought by their parents. They have gone to school here, fell in love here, and very often, they have married an American and have children who are American. If Trump makes a decision that these people must be deported, he is seriously out of touch with human rights.

Trump has dragged his feet on this issue known as the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA. If he moves to deport these people, his presidency will go down in history as really deplorable. I met a man who was deported thanks to the corruption of New York Federal Judges. He came to the States when he was 4 years old. He grew up here, married, and had four children. He owned a photo development shop in the basement of the World Trade Center. An agent persuaded him to take out a loan to buy development equipment rather than send out his customer’s film to be developed. That agent filled out the paperwork as typical and checked a box that he was an American citizen because he had no accent and he just assumed. When 911 hit and he was wiped out, the bank reviewed all loans outstanding and then discovered that he was not an American citizen. He was charged with Bank Fraud. Went to trial because he did not fill out that form and the judge held him guilty anyway. They sentenced him to 7 years in prison and then because he was a felon, he was to be deported. His wife lost the house and her and the four children were living in the basement of a friend on charity.

If Trump further destroys families of such people who did not come here on their own decision, this will be a major disgrace for his presidency.

Categories: Rule of Law
Sep 1 2017

Sekulow, Fleisher and Guilfoyle Discuss Latest Revelations of Corruption Within FBI…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on September 1, 2017 by

In a letter from Senator Chuck Grassley to new FBI Director Christopher Wray (full pdf below) the senator outlines some disturbing information discovered in documents reviewed by the judicial committee.

Chief among the issues was a discovery that fired FBI Director James Comey had already drafted a preliminary conclusion that Hillary Clinton was not going to be held responsible. The FBI Director’s 2016 position was created in April and May before sixteen key investigative witnesses, including Mrs. Clinton herself, were even interviewed. Jay Sekulow, Ari Fleischer and Kimberly Guilfoyle discuss.

.

The revelations within the documents provides even more evidence that FBI Director James Comey was running a political investigation and using the FBI to cover-up for the Clinton email crimes.

WASHINGTON DC – […] The Judiciary Committee reviewed transcripts, which were heavily redacted, indicating Comey began drafting the exoneration statement in April or May 2016, before the FBI interviewed up to 17 key witnesses, including Clinton and some of her close aides.

Comey’s work on the statement also came before the Justice Department entered into immunity agreements with Cheryl Mills, Clinton’s chief of staff while she was Secretary of State, and Heather Samuelson, who served as the State Department’s White House liaison.

Comey announced in July 2016 the FBI wouldn’t recommend criminal charges against Clinton.

Democrats in Congress alleged last fall that Comey’s actions in the FBI’s investigation into Clinton’s email use violated the Hatch Act, which caused the Office of Special Counsel to launch an investigation. (Read More)

Here’s the letter from Senator Grassley and the Senate Judiciary Committee:

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/357737809/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-3AS1jVb3ELCaS5LiMi06

.

Key page: