Economics

Magnitsky Act & the Cover-Up of Unprecedented Corruption | Armstrong Economics

Posted on by johnbarleycorn12

QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong, I seem to recall that in your case HSBC had to plead guilty and paid back only $600 million because the difference in the notes in yen was your profit. Putin specifically mentioned that the $400 was stolen. That was you he was talking about. Then the $10 billion they wanted you to invest in Hermitage Capital was what started your case thanks to a mistake by the Japanese government. Then after watching the Magnitsky movie, it seems like they killed everyone who had knowledge of what was going on as in your case everyone around you was killed. Maybe you survived because you were in contempt of court? You do realize that there were less than 50 views of that movie until you posted it. It has now passed 7,000 views. PKL ANSWER: Yes, the $400 million was the difference. I am not certain it is the same $400 million. Nevertheless, it is amazing how the press does not even look at the fact that how did HSBC plead guilty and only had to pay $600 million on an alleged $1 billion case? It is just amazing how the press will NEVER question the banks or the government. It certainly opened my eyes as to how corrupt the entire system has become. You just have to wonder how they split up that $400 million. Here is the court transcript of the prosecutor Richard D. Owens explaining HSBC would pay the restitution to the court but he failed to explain that the $400 million was our profit he was handing to HSBC and others one must guess. I was flat outright told in soliciting me to invest in Hermitage Capital that Yeltsin would step down and they would have control of the metals, energy, and diamonds of Russia. Keep in mind that Safra was a hard-money guy. He would call the metals desk at his bank every day. The idea of getting hold of the resources of Russia was the grand scheme of manipulating the commodity markets that various New York players had been engaged in for decades. Who was the mastermind? I do not know. Perhaps Putin does. As far as the $10 billion was concerned, many of our Japanese clients believed the case was intentionally created by the Japanese Deep State as a favor to the Americans. We were filing a lawsuit against Republic National Bank and Edmond Safra for taking the money which halted the take over by HSBC. They put in a receiver at O’Melveny & Myers to seize the company and prevent any lawsuit to protect the bank. In 2004, the SEC even moved to end the contempt, but it was O’Melveny & Myers who argued to keep the contempt going against the SEC. The lawyer was Martin Glenn who was later then given a judgeship. This entire series of events appears to be a huge cover-up of an attempt to take over Russia. That is what Putin is saying that they will let Mueller in to interrogate Russians if they can do the same with respect to this entire mess. This is why both movies were banned and nobody in the press will dare to report anything. All they do is call for war effectively with Russia. Here is Putin’s case against Browder. Trump seems willing to open that door. Don’t forget, they have been beating Trump relentlessly about Russia interference in the 2016 elections. Trump’s son was represented by a lawyer I had in my case. So don’t think for a minute that nobody knows the truth. As far as the $10 billion they wanted me to invest into Browder’s Hermitage Capital, here are the two letters from the Japanese government. Notice how they suddenly correct their letter of August 18th on August 31st, 1999 from $10 billion to $1 billion. They would not allow the companies to ever have lawyers, myself, or any of the partners. They simply wanted to make sure nothing would EVER go to trial to keep this issue hidden from the public and this is why they have banned both films in the USA. If it is BS, then why ban it if it is nonsense? In both films, the government was invited to give their version. In both films, they denied any public appearance to deny anything.
— Read on www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/corruption/magnitsky-act-the-cover-up-of-unprecedented-corruption/

International criminals

Trade Wars & Rising Interest Rates – The Top Concerns of Fund Managers | Armstrong Economics

Posted on by johnbarleycorn12

The interesting fact is that the majority of fund managers today have reduced their equity allocation to their lowest level since November 2016 according to Reuters. The reason for this is their focus of trade and their assumption that the Great Depression was caused by a PROTECTIONISM. According to yet a recent monthly report by Bank of America Merrill Lynch (BAML) where they conducted a survey of fund managers, the majority, some 60%, now fear a trade war. Clearly, the biggest concern out there is a trade war poses the greatest risk to the stock market. Another 19% fear excessively higher interest rates by the Federal Reserve. These two perceptions are the dominant reason we see consolidation. However, our computer forecasted the consolidation for 2018 at the start of the year. This has sparked a number of emails asking how was it possible for the computer to forecast consolidation before the fundamentals? What I have noticed over the years in working with this model has been that trends will last ONLY for a specific amount of time. Like being cold all winter and suddenly the sun shines with Spring, we call it “Spring Fever” and everyone runs out at starts doing things when the weather changes. We respond similarly to cycles in markets. They will last only for so long and we get tired. It is NOT that specific fundamental that comes into play and causes the consolidation. Instead, the market trend shifts and people begin to look for explanations to explain it. I have shown charts that demonstrate that rising interest rates are a market myth. The stock market has risen with higher rates and when the market crashes, demand-side economic means they lower rates trying to “stimulate” demand under Keynesianism which has never worked. The ECB has kept rates so low for nearly 10 years and they have destroyed the European bond market as reduced Europe to an economy that is ranked even below China. And as far a trade is concerned, I have shown that Trade Tariffs were a response to the currency and the collapse in agriculture due to the invention of tractors and electricity during the early 20th century. Like the internet today is displacing jobs, electricity reduced the jobs in the manufacture and the combustion engine expanded to tractors reducing employment in agriculture from 40% of the civil workforce to 3% by 1980. Consequently, the computer is forecasting the trend. People try to explain the change in trend and fit the fundamentals to try to explain what took place. I have written before that the book I had to read in school on the Great Crash by Gailbraith, never mention the Sovereign debt crisis of 1931 because he was a socialist who wanted to blame corporations EXCLUSIVELY. Others actually claimed that Hoover embraced the rise of Nazis in Germany because he wanted to trade and ignored Russia. Hitler came to power in 1933 and Hoover lost the election in 1932. They will even alter timelines to support a predetermined conclusion. The trend changes due to cycles for we can only endure a trend for so long before we just want a change as we do in politics. The cycles are not altered by the fundamentals. Commentators fit the fundamentals to explain the cycle. The sharp decline in asset allocation to equities has not been met with a collapse in market prices. This is a very interesting development for the majority NEVER manages to sell the high.
— Read on www.armstrongeconomics.com/markets-by-sector/interest-rates/trade-wars-rising-interest-rates-the-top-concerns-of-fund-managers/