Money Flow Trading Method along with Risk Management

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitic...ops+to+zero%29

Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Asia Times,
The whole planet has every reason to be terminally puzzled at how all those lofty Enlightenment ideals Thomas Jefferson embedded in the 1776 Declaration of Independence ended up with... Trump vs. Biden.

https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...PE-600x469.jpg

Jefferson borrowed freely from Locke, Rousseau, Hume to come up with an eminently quotable Greatest Hits, featuring “self-evident” truths such as “all men are created equal”, “unalienable rights”, and that searing “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”
Well, Baudrillard would have dubbed the exercise a mere simulacrum, because in real life none of this uplifting rhetoric applied to Native Americans and enslaved Africans.

Still, there’s something endlessly fascinating about these “self-evident truths”. They actually radiated like Spinoza axioms, spawning abstract truths that can be extrapolated at will. Jefferson’s “self-evident truths” ended up creating the whole, massive structure of what we define as “Western liberal democracy”.

So it’s no wonder that America – perennially self-described as “leader of the free world” – consider these “self-evident truths” as the basis of an ideal society.

And it’s this messianic river of fervent truth flowing out of a Himalaya of Morality that leads Americans to dismiss as “malign actors” every nation or society that is judged to be “deviating” from such obvious evidence.

Those damned furreners. They’re always up to no good.
Cut to a mini-remix of the last Trump-Biden presidential debate. In foreign policy terms, it went something like this.

The moderator is desperate to move on as she’s very much aware of time constraints and looming, incandescent clashes: “Now I want to move on to Defense. It’s established Russia and China are interfering in our election process…”

Here’s classic “self-evident truth” material, delivered according to strict Council on Foreign Relations guidelines.
Cut to Biden: any country that interferes with the American elections “will pay a price”. Russia’s “been involved, China has been involved to some degree, and Iran’s been involved.” They are interfering with “American sovereignty”. Rudy Giuliani was used “as a Russian pawn”. Trump is “unwilling” to confront Putin. Russia has “destabilized NATO” and is “paying bounties to kill Americans in Afghanistan.” And China “has to play by the rules” – or else.

Cut to Trump: “You mean the laptop from hell is another Russia, Russia, Russia hoax?”
For the record: Joe Biden did blame the contents of son Hunter’s laptop from hell on Russia.
And discussing North Korea, when Trump said he got along fine with Kim Jong-Un, Biden stated, “We had a good relationship with Hitler before he invaded Europe.” Incidentally, Germany is and remains in Europe. And it’s quite something to see Biden acknowledging in public proven US industrial and political support to Nazism.

Those damn furreners
So, inevitably, the laptop from hell had to show up.

The FBI had Hunter Biden’s laptop since December 2019 – as it had issued a subpoena for it in the first place. And yet the FBI sat on the laptop for 11 months doing nothing.

That must have given plenty of time for those pesky Russians to steal the laptop and plant incriminating evidence.
Well, not really. The FBI was busy mulling how to conduct an investigation on “money laundering”. And not on child porn – which, according to Giuliani, is the piece de resistance in the laptop. No one knows if these alleged “investigations” are ongoing.

Now, the FBI and the Department of Justice have finally “concurred”: Hunter Biden’s laptop and emails were not part of a Russian disinformation campaign – directly contradicting what Joe Biden said in the debate.

But then, right before the debate, a bombshell presser – including the FBI and Homeland Security – had announced those pesky Russians and Iranians were in fact “trying to influence opinion” on the US elections.

“Self-evident truths” were back with a bang.
One can’t make this stuff up.

And it gets even murkier when the actual “election interference” may be coming from inside the US, not from those damn furreners.
This past summer, the Transition Integrity Project (TIP) war-gamed possible scenarios post-November 3. All the scenarios lead to a huge constitutional crisis – forced, as part of the premise, by Trump’s refusal to concede his defeat at the polls.

TIP, predictably, is a proverbial Beltway bubble, composed of assorted Democratic Party higher-ups, Clintonistas, Obamistas and neo-con Never Trumpers.

Their message is now widely accepted as another avatar of “self-evident truths” because of this group’s powerful grip over Anglo-American mainstream media. Reverberations may be seen, for instance, here, here and here.

So the preferred doomsday scenario ahead spells out an engineered unresolved election, wide socio-political chaos, “continuity of government” protocols, even martial law.

What’s “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” got to do with it?

https://wallstreetonparade.com/2020/...ould-we-worry/

The Fed Did a Lot of Talking Yesterday about a Big Bank Failure: Should We Worry?

By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: October 21, 2020 ~
Turns out the federal government’s plan for dealing with a mega bank failure on Wall Street is no better conceived than the federal government’s plan for dealing with the worst pandemic since 1918.

The Federal Reserve issued two press releases yesterday about “large banks.” One read: “Agencies finalize rule to reduce the impact of large bank failures.” The other read: “Agencies issue final rule to strengthen resilience of large banks.”

Wait. What? Fed Chairman Jerome Powell has been telling anyone who would listen this year – from Congress to viewers of the Today show – that the large banks have been a “source of strength” during the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression. If that were true (which we’ve questioned from the first time Powell said it) why is the Fed now worrying about a “large bank failure” and the need to “strengthen” large banks?

The first press release from the Fed yesterday deals with the fact that the biggest banks on Wall Street remain interconnected to one another. If you recall, in 2008 the interconnections of Lehman Brothers, Citigroup and AIG to the biggest banks on Wall Street created a daisy chain of rapid meltdowns across Wall Street.

So federal regulators had this plan: They would make the largest banks issue TLAC debt – “Total Loss Absorbing Capacity” debt. The idea, according to the regulators, was that this “debt could be used to recapitalize the holding company during bankruptcy or resolution if it were to fail,” rather than putting the taxpayer on the hook for another massive bailout like 2008.

Now, if you read between the lines of the finalized rule, it would appear that the banks have attempted to game this plan by buying up their own and/or each other’s TLAC debt, thus increasing the very interconnectedness and systemic risk that the federal regulators were trying to avoid. So the federal regulators, including the Fed, are going to spank the large banks by penalizing them on what they will count toward their regulatory capital if they hold their own or other bank’s TLAC debt.

The problem is that the largest interconnected risk between the banks is not their mutual holdings of each other’s debt, which is in the billions of dollars, but their mutual holdings of each other’s derivatives, which are in the trillions of dollars, in terms of face amount. The tangle of incestuous derivative relationships is as bad, if not worse, than it was in 2008. And these trillions of dollars in derivatives, thanks to a repeal of a part of Dodd-Frank through lobbying by Citigroup, are still sitting at the federally-insured part of the Wall Street bank, where the taxpayer is still on the hook for any blowup.

Credit default swaps, which allow Wall Street banks to buy and sell bets on which banks or corporations will blow up in a crisis, played a major role in the 2008 financial collapse. Despite that, according to the September 30, 2019 report from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), JPMorgan Chase has exposure to $1.2 trillion in Credit Default Swaps while Citibank has exposure to $1.76 trillion. According to the same OCC report, the total exposure to Credit Default Swaps among all national banks in the U.S. is $3.7 trillion – meaning that just these two banks are responsible for 80 percent of that exposure.

https://wallstreetonparade.com/wp-co...d-Citibank.jpg

Who is on the other side of these trades, i.e., the counterparty? No one really knows because these are mostly private contracts between two parties. That was supposed to change under Dodd-Frank, where the derivatives would become centrally-cleared or traded on exchanges, but the majority of derivatives remain over-the-counter private contracts.

Phil Angelides was the Chair of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission that investigated the causes of the 2008 crash. On June 30, 2010, he had this to say at a hearing convened specifically to examine “The Role of Derivatives in the Financial Crisis.”

“I must say that despite 30 years in housing, finance, and investment — in both the public and private sectors — I had little appreciation of the tremendous leverage, risk, and speculation that was growing in the dark world of derivatives. Neither, apparently, did the captains of finance nor our leaders in Washington.

“The sheer size of the derivatives market is as stunning as its growth. The notional value of over the-counter derivatives grew from $88 trillion in 1999 to $684 trillion in 2008. That’s more than ten times the size of the Gross Domestic Product of all nations. Credit derivatives grew from less than a trillion dollars at the beginning of this decade to a peak of $58 trillion in 2007. These derivatives multiplied throughout our financial markets, unseen and unregulated. As I’ve explored this world, I feel like I have walked into a bank, opened a door, and seen a casino as big as New York, New York. Unlike Claude Rains in Casablanca we should be ‘shocked, shocked’ that gambling is going on.

“As the financial crisis came to a head in the fall of 2008, no one knew what kind of derivative related liabilities the other guys had. Our free markets work when participants have good information. When clarity mattered most, Wall Street and Washington were flying blind…”

We’re still flying blind. For an idea of how the mega banks on Wall Street game the system, take a look at the graph below showing the counterparties to Goldman Sachs’ derivatives in 2008. Pay attention to the fact that three of the counterparties to Goldman – JPMorgan Chase, UBS, and Deutsche Bank – are using their London branches, thus making transparency impossible for U.S. regulators. Does any sensible person believe that’s not happening today?

https://wallstreetonparade.com/wp-co...ne-2008-ii.jpg

Source: Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission

Under the Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation of 2010, the Office of Financial Research (OFR) was created to provide timely warnings of systemic risk to federal regulators of banks. OFR researchers, Jill Cetina, Mark Paddrik, and Sriram Rajan, released a study in 2016 showing that, in their opinion, the Fed’s stress test that measures derivatives counterparty risk on a bank by bank basis is all wrong. The problem, according to the researchers, is not what would happen if the largest counterparty to a specific bank failed but what would happen if that counterparty happened to be the counterparty to other systemically important Wall Street banks. (Think Lehman Brothers, Citigroup and AIG in 2008.)

Cetina, Paddrik, and Rajan wrote that the Fed’s stress test “looks exclusively at the direct loss concentration risk, and does not consider the ramifications of indirect losses that may come through a shared counterparty, who is systemically important.” By focusing on “bank-level solvency” instead of the system as a whole, the Fed may be ignoring the real problem of systemic risks in the system. The researchers explained further:
“A BHC [bank holding company] may be able to manage the failure of its largest counterparty when other BHCs do not concurrently realize losses from the same counterparty’s failure. However, when a shared counterparty fails, banks may experience additional stress. The financial system is much more concentrated to (and firms’ risk management is less prepared for) the failure of the system’s largest counterparty. Thus, the impact of a material counterparty’s failure could affect the core banking system in a manner that CCAR [one of the Fed’s stress tests] may not fully capture.”

What does it say about our federal regulatory structure when the same dangers that blew up the U.S. financial system, the U.S. economy and the U.S. housing market in 2008 are still with us today? What does it say about who is really in control of Congress?

(See Meet Your Newest Legislator: Citigroup.)

As for the second press release issued by the Fed yesterday, it turns out that the Fed is not really trying to “strengthen resilience of large banks” but is going to further degrade the safeguards. According to Fed Governor Lael Brainard, who cast a dissenting vote, the finalized rule will dramatically reduce the liquidity held by the largest banks – liquidity that would support them in the case of a run on the bank. You can read her full statement here.

If you need further convincing that the Fed has been fully captured by the mega banks on Wall Street, read our more than 100 articles since March on that topic at this specially created archive.

So on September 13, 2020 this FXCM UK Demo account was opened and on October 26, 2020 which is today, the last of 44 Forex trades was done.

41 of the 44 Forex trades were winning trades. The three losing trades were losses of $5018.24 US Dollars, $1378.50 US Dollars and $255.30 US Dollars.

The total Net Profit is $14,567.74 US Dollars which is 29.00% which includes one Major Loss of over 10%. This done in a period of 42 days or 6 weeks of Forex trading. This averages to 20% a month Return On Investment.

So the results are way above what the best Forex traders in the world can achieve.

Why ? 18 years of Forex trading experience and my unique method of Money Flow trading with Superior Risk Management methods.


Please post your comments and join with me in allowing me to teach you my most unique Forex trading method.


Aviel Forex Learning Edge Corporation

Since the FXCM UK $50,000 US Dollars Demo account was opened on September 13, 2020 by one of my Forex students with the first Forex trade done on September 14, 2020, there have been 44 FX trades with 41 winning trades and 3 losing trades. That is a winning percentage of over 90% and more importantly the Net Profit is over $14,500 US Dollars in 6 weeks of trading which is over 20% Return on Investment. I did all the trades in this account in order to show my student in LIVE TIME how it is done.

If you want to learn my unique methods of Forex trading please send me an email to [email protected]

The cost of the 90 day course is $500 US Dollars.

Afterwards you can continue to learn and improve your Forex trading skills by becoming a subscriber to my corporate website at a monthly cost of $50 US Dollars.

Please post any questions or feedback here on my thread.


Bruce

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/i...YHPI_jg9h7xlbk

Blog/Politics
Posted Oct 27, 2020 by Martin Armstrong
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/w...19/10/Bias.jpg
COMMENT: For months now you have been saying that these elections will be the most corrupt ever (‘Our Model still shows a Trump Victory if it is a legitimate election’). Trump is repeating this message as well and obviously his voters have been indoctrinated as well. So far, no evidence whatsoever, just heating up emotions. Votes by post vulnerable to fraude? Could be, but so far in history no evidence whatsoever. Statistically totally in-significant. Are the Democrats saints? Sure not. But is Trump and/or the Republicans any better. Definitely not. How sad I never hear you talk about gerry-mandering, closing voting offices, requiring absurd conditons to let people just vote (e.g. let voters travel miles and miles to vote, require a driving licence to vote, etc. etc.). The number of dirty tricks the Republicans have invented to frustrate the process, to queston of beforehand the legality of the process, how sad you never mention these. You claim you are neutral, but I only hear you constantly blaming the Democrats. You seem to support Trump because he is an outsider, a business man. Hahaha, Trump divides, not unifies, and gives a damn about the country and its inhabitants. He truly believes the state should serve him, not vice versa (immunity!). He is not even a business man, let alone a succesful one. Loaded with debts, leveraged up until his ears. Without daddy’s money and the tricks of his friends he would have been a frustrated, middle of the road man. Again, is Biden a saint? Certainly not. But your blogs are incredibly biased.
PH
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/w...-John-Evil.jpg
REPLY: All of the things you have mentioned are indicative of the corruption in this election, with the exception of gerrymandering which has been an old trick going on for decades by both sides depending on who is in power. In some states it is pro-Democrats and in others it is pro-Republican. When John Boehner (Republican) was Speak of the House, I wrote that he was the “most-evil-dictator-of-congress-in-history.” Pelosi has followed that path. The corruption is massive and it is being carried out by deliberately crashing the economy, the American oligarchs like Gates & Soros, riots that are being encouraged, and the corruption in mainstream media deliberating suppressing the Biden corruption (which would be a crime of obstruction of justice by anyone else). The National Post just ran a story:
Suppressing the Biden stories is a journalistic crime of historic proportions
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/w...hner-Obama.jpg
I have had a front-row seat for decades. Some say that is why they have tried to do at least a political assassination of me when their attempt to kill me failed. I have told the dark secrets behind the Cheney usurpation of our government using Bush Jr. as a place-holder, and now they are doing again with Biden. It was the Republican Rumsfeld who hid the missing trillions from the Defense budget. I can tell you from inside sources that when the Tea Party had about 80 people who were first elected, John Boehner held the traditional orientation meeting for newly elected people. He told them they were to vote according to the Republic Party position. They rebelled and Boehner could not deliver the Republican vote.
This is how “Party Politics” really works. You can vote for someone who says what they stand for and when they get to Washington, they are not allowed to do anything they promised if it contradicts their party. Perhaps you should go back on the site and see what I wrote about the Republicans when they had control of the House. I am against party politics for it is hypocritical and denies you the right to vote based on issues.
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/w...in-Hillary.jpg
I have shown how McCain was in bed with Hillary and he handed the Steele Dossier to Comey to give it Republican cover when it was funded by Hillary. It was Senator Chuck Schumer who introduced on 07/19/2018 the resolution to deny Putin to question any Americans including Bill Browder in exchange to allow Mueller to question Russians. John McCain, the sponsor of the Magnitsky Act, led the charge among Republicans to support Schumer’s resolution to deny any investigation into the Magnitsky affair. One of my lawyers was even in the infamous Trump Tower Meeting where they sought to inform Trump of the truth behind the Magnitsky Act or which that Documentary film was also banned. I have come out against Lindsey Graham when he said terrorists should be denied lawyers — that is against international law.
You fail to understand the issue. Even the Republicans were against Trump NOT because he was a businessman, but because he was an outsider. They said the same thing about Ronald Reagan, but it was more behind the curtain back then than today. There is no hope of eliminating this level of corruption until we eliminate career politicians and party politics for that matter.
There are TWO MAJOR types of People who Want to be President
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/w...3/Gibbon-5.jpg
Indeed, there are TWO MAJOR types of people who want to be president — (1) for money, and (2) for esteem. Hillary and Biden as well as McCain are just three examples of type #1. Obama, who was not worth much when he entered politics, left the White House and bought a house for almost $12 million on the water, despite saying that climate change would result in the oceans rising. Trump is #2 for he wanted to be president to show he has done something on his own, for there will always be that image of “daddy’s money” hanging over his head which will diminish his stature in life. It is that insecurity that is why he ran for president. I have studied all types of governments and our Founding Fathers were influence by the Fake News of Cicero and that was filtered into Edward Gibbon’s “Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire” published in 1776. In fact, Ben Franklin knew Gibbon and even reviewed his work before it was published.
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/w.../10/Hill-4.jpg
All Republics collapse into oligarchies as ours is doing right now. They control both sides of the aisle and they will do whatever they need to do to win. I do not write out of theory. I have actually been in meeting on the Hill many times for decades. I have seen how government works from the inside out.
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/w...enova_1481.jpg

I have investigated all sorts of governments from ancient Rome and Athens to the middle ages and modern times. The European Union was deliberately set up to eliminate the right of the people to vote for the head of state or the European Commission. They gave them a parliament that had no power to overrule the commission. When Greece was in trouble back in 2010 and the head wanted the people to vote on any bailout, the EU threatened to give no money if the Greek people were allowed to vote.
The BEST government I have ever found was that of Genoa. The Doge (president) rotated annually among the rich families. Because a family might not come back to power for decades, they would NEVER pass a law that they themselves would have to comply with if it was unfair. Genoa was run like a corporation competing against Florence and Venice. It was not this nonsense of turning one class against another. EVERYONE benefited.
This is where Trump falls into line. You miss the entire point. Trump will return to a private life so he will NOT impose a law that he himself would find Draconian. Career politicians return to NOTHING. They are taken care of for the rest of their lives and get millions in speaking fees. Obama is in the top-10 highest paid speakers getting $400,000 for a few minutes.
Video Player
00:00
00:52

So I am sorry if you cannot see beyond Republican & Democrat. This is the MOST corrupt election in history. The entire mainstream press is out to remove Trump and will not report the truth about the corruption in the Biden family, which is the standard operating procedure if you investigated the Republicans and Democrats and look at how their families reap in benefits.
You are obviously against Trump and you think I only bash the Democrats. The Democrats are following an agenda that is international. Open your eyes. It is NOT just here in the USA, this is global! I believe in direct democracy which oversees the bureaucracy and the terms should revolve annually. Nobody should be there for more than one year. The Athenian Democracy worked that way.
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/w...12/TAX-CYC.jpg

Without political reform, the nation will dive into civil war. It is not just that one side wins even with 50.7% claiming they have a mandate to then oppress the opposition. Economic policy and taxes should not be a yo-yo. It should take a two-thirds vote to change the nation.
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/w...0/10/Burka.jpg
If the country became 50.7% shite Muslim and ordered all women to stay home and wear burkas, would that be fair? Or perhaps all A students should be reduced to C students and their excess grades should be redistributed so the F students will also get C grades. Sell that one on college campuses.
Categories: Politics
Tags: behavioral economics, corruption, John Boehner, Lindsey Graham, Magnitsky Act, party politics, Trump
« Klaus Schwab & his Communist Revolution
This is What Schwab is Creating »
REGISTER FOR BLOG UPDATE ALERTS
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/w...jax_loader.gif
If you are human, leave this field blank.
BLOG CATEGORIES

1. +Armstrong Economics 101
2. +Armstrong in the Media
3. +Forecasts
4. +History
5. Hong Kong
6. +International News
7. Market Talk
8. +Markets by Sector
9. Plagues
10. +Products and Services
11. Q&A
12. Real Estate
13. Uncategorized
14. +Upcoming Events
15. +World Events

PROMOTIONS
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/w...es-273x140.jpg

1. PROMO

Institutional Service for Small Business
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/w...eo-273x140.jpg

1. PROMO

Instructional Videos
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/w...k-socrates.jpg

1. PROMO

Socrates
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/w...ip-273x140.jpg

1. PROMO

Models and Methodologies
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/w...al-273x140.jpg

1. PROMO

2019 World Economic Conferences
BLOG ARCHIVES

1. October 2020
2. September 2020
3. August 2020
4. July 2020
5. June 2020
6. May 2020

View All

Since the FXCM UK $50,000 US Dollars Demo account was opened on September 13, 2020 by one of my Forex students with the first Forex trade done on September 14, 2020, there have been 48 FX trades with 45 winning trades and 3 losing trades.

That is a winning percentage of over 90% and more importantly the Net Profit is over $16,700.00 US Dollars in 6 weeks and 2 days of trading which is over 33% Return on Investment. I did all the trades in this account in order to show my student in LIVE TIME how it is done.

If you want to learn my unique methods of Forex trading please send me an email to [email protected]

The cost of the 90 day course is $500 US Dollars.

Afterwards you can continue to learn and improve your Forex trading skills by becoming a subscriber to my corporate website at a monthly cost of $50 US Dollars.

Please post any questions or feedback here on my thread.


Bruce

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/i...m_campaign=RSS

Posted Oct 28, 2020 by Martin Armstrong
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/w...5/Lockdown.jpg

The fourth anti-Lockdown protest erupted in London once again. Wikipedia, the leftist controlled pretend neutral media platform, has compiled a list of lockdown protests in the United States. They immediately characterize this as right-wing “conservatives,” which implies, I suppose, that the obedient majority are just sheep who do as they are told and question nothing. NEVER in the history of human society has the entire population ever been locked down. Those who are sick have been quarantined. This is more akin to the disgraceful imprisonment of all Japanese Americans assuming they could not be trusted based upon their ethnicity.

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/w...y-Lockdown.jpg

The exclusion order leading to the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II was held to be constitutional by the Supreme Court which is up there with Dread Scot insofar as being disgraceful decisions. Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 (1944), was a landmark the United States Supreme Court case upholding the exclusion of Japanese Americans from the West Coast Military Area during World War II. The Supreme Court had the audacity to write:
“It should be noted, to begin with, that all legal restrictions which curtail the civil rights of a single racial group are immediately suspect. That is not to say that all such restrictions are unconstitutional.”

The Supreme Court showed that it was just supporting whatever the government desired. They wrote: “But hardships are part of war, and war is an aggregation of hardships.” That is no excuse. In the real landmark case, Marbury v Madison, US 137 (1 Cranch) 1803, the court made it clear at the very beginning: “It cannot be presumed that any clause in the Constitution is intended to be without effect.” Just three years before, the Supreme Court said: “nor was the Bill of Rights intended as a collection of popular slogans.” Bridges v California, 314 US 252, 283-284 (1941).

Justice ROBERTS dissented in Korematsu. He wrote:
I dissent, because I think the indisputable facts exhibit a clear violation of Constitutional rights. This is not a case of keeping people off the streets at night as was Kiyoshi Hirabayashi v. United States, 320 U.S. 81, 63 S.Ct. 1375, 87 L.Ed. 1774, nor a case of temporary exclusion of a citizen from an area for his own safety or that of the community, nor a case of offering him an opportunity to go temporarily out of an area where his presence might cause danger to himself or to his fellows. On the contrary, it is the case of convicting a citizen as a punishment for not submitting to imprisonment in a concentration camp, based on his ancestry, and solely because of his ancestry, without evidence or inquiry concerning his loyalty and good disposition towards the United States. If this be a correct statement of the facts disclosed by this record, and facts of which we take judicial notice, I need hardly labor the conclusion that Constitutional rights have been violated.

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/w...6/04/Sheep.jpg

There is no scientific evidence that locking down the entire world economy will defeat any disease, no less this virus. This is simply an excuse for another agenda and they are counting on the media to terrorize the people. The majority of the people will remain as sheep. Anyone who dares to suggest otherwise is now just a conspiracy theorist, which is a label that allows them to not address any facts whatsoever.

Categories: Rule of Law
Tags: Civil Unrest, coronavirus, Fake News, Lockdown
« Shareholders Pay the Fines & The Bankers Get the Bonuses

REGISTER FOR BLOG UPDATE ALERTS
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/w...jax_loader.gif

If you are human, leave this field blank.
BLOG CATEGORIES

1. +Armstrong Economics 101
2. +Armstrong in the Media
3. +Forecasts
4. +History
5. Hong Kong
6. +International News
7. Market Talk
8. +Markets by Sector
9. Plagues
10. +Products and Services
11. Q&A
12. Real Estate
13. Uncategorized
14. +Upcoming Events
15. +World Events

PROMOTIONS
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/w...es-273x140.jpg

1. PROMO

Institutional Service for Small Business
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/w...eo-273x140.jpg

1. PROMO

Instructional Videos
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/w...k-socrates.jpg

1. PROMO

Socrates
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/w...ip-273x140.jpg

1. PROMO

Models and Methodologies
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/w...al-273x140.jpg

1. PROMO

2019 World Economic Conferences
BLOG ARCHIVES

1. October 2020
2. September 2020
3. August 2020
4. July 2020
5. June 2020
6. May 2020

View All

Since the FXCM UK $50,000 US Dollars Demo account was opened on September 13, 2020 by one of my Forex students with the first Forex trade done on September 14, 2020, there have been 50 FX trades with 47 winning trades and 3 losing trades.

That is a winning percentage of 92% and more importantly the Net Profit is over $17,800.00 US Dollars in 6 weeks and 3 days of trading which is 35% plus, Return on Investment. I did all the trades in this account in order to show my student in LIVE TIME how it is done.

If you want to learn my unique methods of Forex trading please send me an email to [email protected]

The cost of the 90 day course is $500 US Dollars.

Afterwards you can continue to learn and improve your Forex trading skills by becoming a subscriber to my corporate website at a monthly cost of $50 US Dollars.

Please post any questions or feedback here on my thread.


Bruce