Posted Feb 6, 2020 by Martin Armstrong
QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong
Thank you for this education. I’ve had to unlearn almost everything from the MBA I got. They’ll never teach this stuff in schools, it’s too dangerous.
Question: If the Dow closes above the January high in Feb, would that be a cycle inversion, with the market going up when it should have turned down on the Jan 2020 ECM? Or it implies a shallower pullback ahead? I’m still a little confused on how to read the signals.
ANSWER: No, we are not in a cycle inversion. The Dow aligned with the ECM, not the NASDAQ which the forecast array showed was aligned with February, not January. Then Socrates wrote in the report on Friday 31st of January noting there was a RARE event that had taken place on the Weekly Level of our model. Socrates wrote:
RARE SUPER POSITION EVENT
We have elected an Intermediate and Long-Term Weekly Bullish Reversal. However, we have also elected a Short-Term Bearish Reversal in a Superposition Event warning that this may prove to be a low.
As I have warned, this was not going to be a major crash. This is still a choppy consolidation and even at the WEC, I showed we had a consecutive string of Monthly Directional Changes into April. Each market has its own cycle. If it coincides with the ECM, all that reflects is that such a market is often the focus of attention. But this turn in the ECM is so profound, the changes in the trend are so many it appears that perhaps the most serious issue will be political. I warned that Trump would not be found guilty. But this issue shows that there is a constitutional problem. The Framers of the Constitution NEVER took into account that the impeachment process would be so abused in this manner. There was no HIGH CRIME or MISDEMEANOR that Trump committed.
Even Bill Clinton, who did create a felony of perjury that any citizen would have been put in prison for, I disagreed with his impeachment because it was in a private legal case. It did not involve the office of the president. This claim that Trump sought foreign interference in the US election is really bogus. He asked them to “investigate” which if the FBI had asked it would not be an issue. He did not ask to make up something. Hillary paid to create the fake dossier by a foreign agent alleging acts in Russia. She actually did seek to interfere in the election and it was that dossier which then was used by the FBI to wiretap Trump’s campaign. That is Watergate stuff that forced Nixon to resign.
The whistle-blower met with the Democrat Schiff and he not only lied about that, but then they protected his identity when others like Snowden and Assange would be put to death if they could. This is a complete abuse of the whistle-blower statute that Schiff has violated denying Snowden and Assange Equal Protection of the Law. I would not even shake the hand of Schiff. What he has done is just outrageous and an abuse of power of his office. He has undermined the Constitution and destroyed the very power of impeachment forever. It was NEVER intended to be a tool to remove an opponent to influence elections or to bring an impeachment simply because you disagree with the president’s decision.
The Constitution demands that all members of Congress must take an oath of office to support the Constitution before assuming office. In order to comply with the Constitution, Congress has enacted federal laws to execute and enforce this constitutional requirement. Federal law regulating oath of office by government officials is divided into four parts along with an executive order which further defines the law for purposes of enforcement. 5 U.S.C. 3331 provides the text of the actual oath of office members of Congress are required to take before assuming office. 5 U.S.C. 3333 requires ALL members of Congress to sign an affidavit that they have taken the oath of office required by 5 U.S.C. 3331 and have not or will not violate that oath of office during their tenure of office as defined by the third part of the law, 5 U.S.C. 7311 which explicitly makes it a federal criminal offense (and a violation of oath of office) for anyone employed in the United States Government (including members of Congress) to “advocate the overthrow of our constitutional form of government”. The fourth federal law, 18 U.S.C. 1918 provides penalties for violation of the oath office described in 5 U.S.C. 7311 which include: (1) removal from office and; (2) confinement or a fine.
Executive Order 10450 defines “advocate” and specifies it is a violation of 5 U.S.C. 7311 for any person taking the oath of office to advocate “the alteration … of the form of the government of the United States by unconstitutional means.” Our form of government is defined by the Constitution of the United States. It can only be “altered” by constitutional amendment. Thus, according to Executive Order 10450 declarers any actions taken by government officials who have taken the oath of office prescribed by 5 U.S.C. 3331 which alters the form of government other by Constitutional Amendment, is a criminal violation of the 5 U.S.C. 7311.
Adam Schiff should stand trial and a jury should decide if he has violated the Constitution for the personal political gain of his party based upon probable clause that he lied about meeting the whistle-blower.
If we look at the hatred in politics and Pelosi tearing up the State of the Union speech and the Squad not even attending, we have witnessed the very collapse of the United States. This is the end of a functioning government. I BELIEVE this may be the turning point when we look with highlight back on January 18th, 2020.
On January 16th, 2020 at 2 p.m., Chief Justice John Roberts traveled by car from the Supreme Court to the Senate to assume his role as presiding officer over the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump. Roberts received a formal invitation to attend from Secretary of the Senate Julie Adams that morning. Upon arriving at the Senate, Chief Justice Roberts was sworn in by Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa), acting as president pro tempore of the Senate. Shortly after senators took an oath to do “impartial justice,” the body unanimously moved to issue a summons to President Trump notifying him of their trial and the charges against him. That was all the 16th and Trump was required to respond to the summons PRECISELY in writing by Saturday evening the very day of the Economic Confidence Model – January 18th, 2020.
I have been a real scholar of constitutional law. I have even had lawyers call me for my opinion. In law school, they teach you maybe a few weeks on the Constitution. The vast majority of laws are statutory which is really the meat and potatoes. Rarely do issues rise to the level of the Constitution because most laws are presumed to be constitutional and it is your burden to prove they are wrong. What this Impeachment of Trump has demonstrated is that the Founding Fathers never anticipated that politics would disintegrate in such a fashion. The oath the senators took to be “impartial” was a joke – nobody was for this was a partisan battle to the death of the Constitution. The Democrats know they cannot defeat Trump, so they themselves interfered with the 2020 election and tried to have him removed.
After Clinton and Trump impeachments, as a constitutional scholar, these impeachments demonstrate that because the Founding Fathers never defined what constitutes a HIGH CRIME or MISDEMEANOR, it has allowed the process to be abused. This Trump Impeachment to me was the deathblow to the Constitution and any possible hope of a fair, impartial, and reasonable democracy from here on out.
“An individual, except the President, elected or appointed to an office of honor or profit in the civil service or uniformed services shall take the following oath: ‘I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.’”
“…an individual who accepts office or employment in the Government of the United states…shall execute an affidavit within 60 days after accepting the office or employment that his acceptance and holding of the office or employment does not or will not violate section 7311 of this title. The affidavit is prima facie evidence that the acceptance and holding of office or employment by the affiant does not or will not violate section 7311 of this title.”
5 U.S.C. 7311 (1):
“An individual may not accept or hold a position in the Government of the United States of the government of the District of Columbia if he (1) advocates the overthrow of our constitutional form of government…”
“Whoever violates the provisions of section 7311 of title 5 that an individual may not accept or hold a position in the Government of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia if he (1) advocates the overthrow of our constitutional form of government [and] shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year and a day or both.”
- Executive Order 10450