Armstrong Economics Blog
Re-Posted Oct 30, 2016 by Martin Armstrong
Justice officials Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates disagreed with FBI Director James Comey’s decision to notify Congress about the bureau’s review of Hillary emails. Both did not agree playing it technical whereby the Department of Justice (DOJ) does typically announce they are investigating something. Of course, NY States did so with Trump clearly designed to be political. Comey didn’t seek their approval but Lynch had improperly met with Bill Clinton during the investigation and should have been fired for that. She in turn put everything on Comey’s shoulders saying she would accept whatever he said.
Comey is the one who is under fire internally within the FBI who feel he was being political by NOT indicting Hillary. Obama began campaigning for Hillary the very day Comey said he would not recommend and indictment. This decision to tell Congress was his alone and he did not seek their approval. He knows if Hillary came to office he would never remain anyhow and any wrongdoing would never come to light.
Instead, Comey made an totally independent decision to go against longstanding Justice Department and FBI practice to not comment publicly about politically sensitive investigations. But Hillary has used his “no indictment” as an endorsement. Comey’s fingerprints will be all over this issue one way or another.
Comey has explained his decision saying: “We don’t ordinarily tell Congress about ongoing investigations, but here I feel an obligation to do so given that I testified repeatedly in recent months that our investigation was completed.” Comey added: “I also think it would be misleading to the American people were we not to supplement the record.”
Other agents will leak info anyway because they were unanimously in favor of indicting Hillary to start with. Any way we slice this, a Hillary win will be devastating insofar as the next two years will be intense filled with scandals and would more likely than not end in impeachment. On July 27, 1974, the House Judiciary Committee voted 27–11 to recommend the first article of impeachment against the president Richard Nixon for obstruction of justice. The House then recommended the second article, abuse of power, on July 29, 1974.
When we look at the cyclical aspect, 43 years from 1974 (50% of 86-year wave) will be 2017. The previous cycle interval was 1931, when debate on the floor of the Senate echoed words claiming that even a “dictatorship” was better than the pains of depression supporting suggestions of communism or socialism was the way out. Then, the following year, Congressman Louis Thomas McFadden twice introduced impeachment resolutions against President Herbert Hoover.
Hoover lost the 1932 election, so impeachment proceedings just died. When I posed this question to our main computer system, it came back with this result.
It appears that IF Hillary is elected, we will see impeachment proceedings begin by the summer of 2017. Looks like what goes around, comes around. Hillary fought to get Nixon impeached on “obstruction of justice” which she is guilty of at the very least. This is not going to be a walk in the park for Hillary and her refusal to shut down the Clinton Foundation handing it to Chelsea, is only inviting a complete continuation of the scandal pay-for-play. Hillary does not know when to back-off. She constantly pushed the envelop. If she loses to Trump, she will blame Comey.
Let’s face the facts. Our computer does not make emotional or political calls. It has no personal bias as humans. It is what it is. This new evidence is starting to change the game behind the curtain from all our sources fundamentally. Very interesting. Perhaps the computer will be right at the end of the day. The the government wanted the code for our model, it was not about forecasting markets. It was about the rise and fall of governments, civil unrest, and war. They were not concerned if the Dow or gold rose or fell. It was politics only.
Centinel2012 